December 2016 - cooperation-wg

FYI: From the European Commission: human rights guidance for 3 business sectors
by Patrik Fältström 20 Jul '19

20 Jul '19

Hi, As you can see below European Commission just released human rights guidance for 3 business sectors. I have helped COM and specifically IHRB with their piece of the work, and I know others on this list have also helped. Everything from more formal support to extremely good comments that have helped making the documents what they finally ended up being. Patrik Fältström Head of Research and Development Netnod Begin forwarded message: > From: <entr-csr(a)ec.europa.eu> > Subject: From the European Commission: human rights guidance for 3 business sectors > Date: 17 juni 2013 18:23:09 CEST > To: <entr-csr(a)ec.europa.eu> > > We are pleased to announce the publication of the European Commission Sector Guides on Implementing the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. > > > Download the Guides here: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newsroom/cf/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=6711&lang… > > The Guides – for employment and recruitment agencies, ICT companies, and oil and gas companies – were developed over the past 18 months by Shift and IHRB through extensive research and multistakeholder consultation with representatives from the three industries as well as governments, trade unions, civil society, academia and other experts. Read more about the Guides’ development here. > > Each Guide offers practical advice on how to implement the corporate responsibility to respect human rights in day-to-day business operations in each industry through step-by-step guidance. At each step, they summarise what the UN Guiding Principles expect, offer a range of approaches and examples for how to put them into practice, and link users to additional resources that can support their work. They are intended to help companies “translate” respect for human rights into their own systems and cultures. > > Many thanks to all those who have contributed to this process. > > Best regards, > > > CSR Team > > European Commission > Enterprise and Industry Directorate-General > Unit ENTR.D.1 >

6 12

Re: [cooperation-wg] RIPE NCC Contribution to the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation
by Richard Hill 27 Dec '16

27 Dec '16

Dear Gordon Thank you for this. As you may recall, I was a member of the WSIS secretariat when the text in question was negotiated and I was involved in the discussions. As I recall, the term "enhanced coordination" was used as a an euphemism for "end unilateral US control of Internet governance in general and of ICANN and IANA in particular". However, after the text was agreed, there was disagreement regarding its intent: as I recall, the USA took the view that the intent was to encourage more cooperation amongst UN agencies and between those agencies and other Internet governance bodies such as ICANN. But others might have different recollections. Best Richard Sent from Samsung Mobile. <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13(a)gmail.com> </div><div>Date:26/12/2016 10:46 (GMT-04:00) </div><div>To: Cooperation WG <cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net> </div><div>Cc: Chris Buckridge <chrisb(a)ripe.net> </div><div>Subject: Re: [cooperation-wg] RIPE NCC Contribution to the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation </div><div> </div>I find it interesting how the term “enhanced cooperation” has been interpreted in ways that I think are quite different to what was in the minds of at least some of the people who I understand originally proposed it. In EU relations “enhanced cooperation” has a specific meaning. It was introduced in the Treaty of Amsterdam: so akin to a "term of art”, if you will. Enhanced cooperation, in the EU, was not meant to imply simply better cooperation: it was about differentiated cooperation. In that environment it was and is about some, not all, member states cooperating more fully, more closely, on certain items even in the absence of a wider consensus. So the idea was that, even in a UN-related context, certain states could cooperate more closely, even in the absence of more general agreement? Given the significant on-going restructuring in terms of international relationships one might imagine a shift back to the original intent. Happy holidays! Gordon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_cooperation > On 23 Dec 2016, at 11:42, Chris Buckridge <chrisb(a)ripe.net> wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > One of the outcomes of last year’s 10-year review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) was the formation of a Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation on Public Policy Issues Pertaining to the Internet (WGEC). Established under the United Nations’ Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD), the Working Group was set up in response to the feeling expressed by some UN Member States that there was a need to "develop recommendations on how to further implement enhanced cooperation as envisioned in the Tunis Agenda." > > More information on the Working Group is available at: > http://unctad.org/en/Pages/CSTD/WGEC-2016-to-2018.aspx > > Coming out of the Working Group’s initial meeting in September, there was an open call for contributions in response to two questions: > >> - What are the high level characteristics of enhanced cooperation? >> - Taking into consideration the work of the previous WGEC and the Tunis Agenda, particularly paragraphs 69-71, what kind of recommendations should we consider? > > > Working closely with one of the technical community members of the Working Group, Nick Ashton-Hart, the RIPE NCC developed and submitted a document responding to these questions: > https://www.ripe.net/participate/internet-governance/multi-stakeholder-enga… > > In summary, the document notes that, while cooperation amongst all stakeholders is vital in developing Internet capacity, it is important that these efforts focus on practical benefits, and that they be minimally distortive or disruptive to the shared platform that is the Internet. > > The Working Group will hold its next meeting on 26-27 January 2017 in Geneva, where it will consider the contributions received and the way forward for its work. > > Happy, as always, to discuss any questions or comments. Meanwhile, best wishes to those celebrating Christmas/New Year in the coming days and weeks! > > Cheers, > > Chris Buckridge > External Relations Manager > RIPE NCC

5 6

Re: [cooperation-wg] RIPE NCC Contribution to the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation
by rhill＠hill-a.ch 26 Dec '16

26 Dec '16

1 0

RIPE NCC Contribution to the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation
by Chris Buckridge 26 Dec '16

26 Dec '16

Dear colleagues, One of the outcomes of last year’s 10-year review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) was the formation of a Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation on Public Policy Issues Pertaining to the Internet (WGEC). Established under the United Nations’ Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD), the Working Group was set up in response to the feeling expressed by some UN Member States that there was a need to "develop recommendations on how to further implement enhanced cooperation as envisioned in the Tunis Agenda." More information on the Working Group is available at: http://unctad.org/en/Pages/CSTD/WGEC-2016-to-2018.aspx Coming out of the Working Group’s initial meeting in September, there was an open call for contributions in response to two questions: > - What are the high level characteristics of enhanced cooperation? > - Taking into consideration the work of the previous WGEC and the Tunis Agenda, particularly paragraphs 69-71, what kind of recommendations should we consider? Working closely with one of the technical community members of the Working Group, Nick Ashton-Hart, the RIPE NCC developed and submitted a document responding to these questions: https://www.ripe.net/participate/internet-governance/multi-stakeholder-enga… In summary, the document notes that, while cooperation amongst all stakeholders is vital in developing Internet capacity, it is important that these efforts focus on practical benefits, and that they be minimally distortive or disruptive to the shared platform that is the Internet. The Working Group will hold its next meeting on 26-27 January 2017 in Geneva, where it will consider the contributions received and the way forward for its work. Happy, as always, to discuss any questions or comments. Meanwhile, best wishes to those celebrating Christmas/New Year in the coming days and weeks! Cheers, Chris Buckridge External Relations Manager RIPE NCC

3 5

RIPE NCC and Europol Sign MoU to Enhance Internet Security
by Paul Rendek 15 Dec '16

15 Dec '16

Dear colleagues, I’m pleased to announce that the RIPE NCC and Europol signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) at Europol’s headquarters in The Hague on 14 December 2016. The MoU builds on our long-standing relationship with Europol’s European Cybercrime Centre (EC3), with a focus on lending one another expertise in the areas of cybercrime and Internet security. You can find the full news announcement online: https://www.ripe.net/publications/news/about-ripe-ncc-and-ripe/europol-mou You can also find the MoU itself, along with the other agreements we have with external organisations, on the RIPE NCC website: https://www.ripe.net/about-us/what-we-do/engagement-external-organisations Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. Kind regards, Paul Rendek Director of External Relations RIPE NCC

1 0

IGF workshop on IoT - follow live
by Chris Buckridge 06 Dec '16

06 Dec '16

Dear colleagues, In around one hour (15:00 UTC, Tuesday 6 December), the NRO is facilitating a workshop at the Internet Governance Forum on the Internet of Things. Entitled "The Network of Networked Things: Finding the Internet in IoT”, the session will discuss the impact of the IoT on existing standardisation and administrative bodies, as well as the needs and expectations of IoT end users. You can read more about the workshop at: https://igf2016.sched.org/event/8hsh/ws170-the-network-of-networked-things-… You can follow the session live, and contribute via Webex here: https://intgovforum.webex.com/mw3100/mywebex/default.do?service=1&siteurl=i… Or feel free to tweet thoughts and responses to @ripe_ncc, and we’ll follow them in the room. Any questions, please feel free to hit me up directly via email. Best regards, Chris Buckridge RIPE NCC

1 0

Q: What is the latest trend in Internet connectivity offerings?
by Alessandro Vesely 05 Dec '16

05 Dec '16

Hi all, as asked in ISOC survey, it seems there are a few big players who dominate Internet connectivity market, more and more convoluted with telephone. Here in Italy, for reasons beyond my understanding, you are bound to get a residential connection unless you have a VAT number. I really cannot understand the rationale for that, and it looks to me as a gratuitous limitation of individual freedom. Personally, I'm unable to get a non-filtered, static IP connection since I closed my VAT account (after my tax preparer's recommendation). I'll probably have to give up running my own email server. In addition, I've never been able to get IPv6 addresses --perhaps that needs a fiscal reform, eh? Is it that way all over Europe, or is it just Italy? Can anyone shed some light on why it is so? TIA Ale

8 8