DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] NDNHC and ITU-T

----- Original Message -----
From: "Hill, Richard" <richard.hill@itu.int>
To: <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
Cc: <tony.ar.holmes@bt.com>; <hfeld@mediaacess.org>; <council@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 1:43 PM
Subject: [council] NDNHC and ITU-T

> I noticed an exchange of E-Mails at:
>   http://www.icann-ncc.org/pipermail/discuss/2002-April/002001.html
> And would appreciate it if the following comments could be posted.
> > Tony Holmes wrote:
> >You say those arguing these positions say ITU intergovernmental groups
> generally are
> > more responsive to NGO and Civil Society concerns than ICANN. The
> is that in ICANN
> > these groups at least have the opportunity to represent their views in
> debates first hand, its
> >not necessarily the case in the ITU. The ITU TSB cannot dictate policy on
> their own, it has to come
> >through the Member State mechanisms, however the work is actually done in
> the ITU Study Groups.
> It is correct that work is done in the ITU Study Groups, and that TSB does
> not create policy (much less dictate it!).  It is not correct that
> (which in ITU-T are called "contributions") can come only from Member
> States.  Any ITU-T member can send a contribution, and all are discussed.
> ITU-T Sector Members can be commercial companies, or NGO's.  NGO's can ask
> for a waiver from payment of membership fees.  Many (like the Red Cross)
> have received the waiver of fees.
> >Its worth pointing out that within SG2 there are only a handful who
> understand, or even have
> > first hand experience of, Internet matters. Would your members really be
> happy in handing
> > them greater responsibility???
> I'm not sure that fewer than 5 people within SG2 have understanding of, or
> experience in, Internet matters, I think the number is larger.  But this
> beside the point.  If SG2 were to start working more intensively on
> matters, its active, participating, membership would increase to include
> more people with the relevant experience.
> Obviously it makes no sense to have technical matters be discussed by
> who don't know the subject matter, and it was never proposed that this be
> the case.
> The idea is to expand membership as required so that the right
> and the right experts participate in the work.
> ITU's membership rules are, we believe, open enough to allow participation
> by the right people.
> >If any supports is going to be expressed for the ITU to become more
> > involved its really important that all these dimensions are fully
> understood,
> >otherwise the results may well be quite different from what was
> I fully agree with this statement and would urge all interested parties to
> consult the ITU web site for more information on ITU, or to ask me
> questions which I will be pleased to answer.
> Richard Hill
> -----------------------------------------
> Richard Hill
> Counsellor, SG2
> International Telecommunication Union
> Place des Nations
> CH-1211 Geneva 20
> Switzerland
> tel: +41 22 730 5887
> FAX: +41 22 730 5853
> Email: richard.hill@itu.int
> Study Group 2 email: tsbsg2@itu.int

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>