CircleID

Come over to the Internet Governance Forum instead, John.  Yes it is also a little dysfunctional (see http://igfwatch.org/ for commentary on this aspect), but it is acting in issue areas that are more important, though lower profile than Internet naming and numbering (because there is less money in them).  There are dynamic coalitions of the IGF (which you are welcome to join) for issues such as spam, privacy, open standards, IPR/A2K, Internet Bill of Rights, freedom of expression, access for remote communities, and my own baby, remote participation.  The IGF would only need fraction of the interest shown from volunteers in ICANN in order to achieve significantly more.  The official IGF site is at http://www.intgovforum.org, and the community site is (for now) at http://igf2006.info/.

IGF has a lot of commonalities with ICANN -

1. Academics with biased agendas (semipro)

2. A large "civil society" crowd - again what John calls semipros - most of which alternate slogan shouting with scarfing down spoonfuls of caviar topped salmon http://www.mccullagh.org/photo/1ds-12/igf-reception

3. The usual industry players

4. Unbiased idealists - some with impractical, head in the clouds, ideas - and others who are also practical, and who can actually bridge the gap between technical, policy and government types (John is one of the very few people I know in a very broad cross section of people who can do this, and do it well)

4. Exotic, far flung locations (a beach resort in Greece, Rio, New Delhi ...)

5. No funding / travel support for attendees [which is probably a good thing, cuts down what'd be a far huger number of freeloaders who couldnt get funding from one of several NGOs]

Probably the one difference is the deliberate lack of a huge bureaucracy, and of a decision making process.  IGF is designed as a talk shop, and as a place for people to network (layer 9's importance should never be underestimated) - and at that, it has been a success. 

I've been at a bunch of different forums and on quite a few lists - antispam / malware, igov, network ops etc, and IGF is about the one place where I can see people from all those fora, with shared interests, together in the same room.

Oh - about the one panel I really appreciated in IGF (other than the stopspamalliance one, which I strongly recommend) was David Allen's "Academics in the IGF" panel - it has a lot of potential, and probably some of the most brilliant people who were at the Athens IGF were in that room.

Suresh, I believe Declan's picture was taken at a reception put on by the Greek government for the volunteers who helped staff the meeting. Perhaps tagging the photo "Greek govt say thanks to IGF volunteers" would give a different flavour? (sorry :-)

As for "exotic, far flung locations".  The governments of Greece, Brazil (2007), India (2008), Egypt (2009) and either Lithuania and Azerbaijan (both "bidding" for 2010) have offered to host the meeting free of charge. 

Where would a mundane location be? Paris (OECD), Geneva (ITU and UN), New York (UN). Like ICANN, IGF is trying to reach people who otherwise wouldn't have such events in their region. And they do it by accepting offers to host free of charge.  ICANN takes a lot of criticism for being a travelling circus, but how else can it (or IGF) more clearly demonstrate a commitment to international participation?

A meeting was held in Geneva a couple of weeks ago to take stock of the successes and failures of the Athens IGF, full transcript available http://www.intgovforum.org/Feb_igf_meeting/13_February_Consult_2007.txt And the secretariat is still hoping people will comment on what went well/less well, and how to improve the meeting in Rio—online form for comments http://info.intgovforum.org/Q2006v2.php

Hi Adam - yes I'm aware the meetings are hosted free of charge - and certainly appreciate the gracious gesture of the governments that have agreed to host IGF.

However, please consider that a "greatest good of the greatest number" policy means that holding one of these in Europe - or in a major asian / US based airline hub is actually a better idea than it sounds. 

The reason is direct flights, and far cheaper air tickets available to major airline hubs from most parts of the world.  In fact, for a continent like africa, you'll find that its often cheaper to fly KLM or Lufthansa to Europe, or Emirates to Dubai, and then back into another african country rather than fly within the continent.

That is why, when I and my colleagues on the apricot management committee evaluate bids to host APRICOT we would prefer that it be hosted in a city that has a major international airport, rather than a fun beach resort that requires connecting flights from some other city.  Yup we did the recent apricot in Bali, but then Denpasar Bali (DPS) has international flights from all over asia coming into it ..

The "traveling circus" criticism is actually enhanced by having the meeting in a location that has a tourism cachet to it.  Do a meeting in a profoundly uniteresting and drab place like (for example) Minneapolis, or Bombay, and you'll find that far more people prefer to attend the meeting than to sneak out for a spot of sun and sand.

I didn't know that the Greek post office reception was only for IGF volunteers - didnt see any signage saying that, and saw quite a few attendees / speakers piling onto the caviar just as assiduously as anyone else :)

John, thank you for a job well done. I appreciated your representation.

Best Regards,

Martin Hannigan
Plain-old Internet User

Dear John,

I really appreciated your saying. First of all, I don't like the three-tier design ALS--RALO--ALAC--ICANN at all. I said it at ICANN Marrakech meeting already.
1. No matter individual or ALS, they have no resource (money, time and people) to participate ICANN process.
2. The process of ALS is too slow (since they have no real political power at all).
3. It should be ALS--ALAC--ICANN. ICANN should invite all the ALS to join the ALAC meeting at least once a year to discuss issues we concerned. And ICANN should provide minimum resource for those ALS to such meeting (even just one airline ticket and cheap hotel for one ALS).
At ICANN Lisbon meeting, it loooks like RALO in process (Latin American, Africa, Asia Pacific, Europe). Actually, all the RALO have a long way to go (sufficient resource for them to survive and in work). The most importance is how to link ALS to RALO, and RALO to ALAC, and ALAC to ICANN? During APRALO process in Bali meeting on Feb. 2007 (it can have such meeting because ICANN provide money for each ALS to have one person to join the meeting), my friends asked me "how you not run for officers or ALAC?". My answer are (1) I have no idea to make it really effective with solid and reasonable resource. And I hate to raise such money from each ALS, because I know they have no resource to do so. (2) I worry to be the ALAC and can not present the concern from RALO's consensus. And it is just my personal view or opinion. There are many questions without answer. But we should not give up to push or watch the process of ICANN and Internet Governance, because we have to live with Internet no matter what.