This is now a legacy site and could be not up to date. Please move to the new IGF Website at

You are here

IGF 2016 2nd Open Consultations and MAG Meeting July 12

The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during the Second Open Consultations and Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) Meeting for IGF 2016 in New York, USA, from 12 to 14 July 2016. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the event, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.


12 July 2016

New York, USA


>>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  Good morning, everyone.  And apologize if this seems a little unusual for such a timely, rapid start for an IGF MAG meeting.  But we're very honored today to have the Under-Secretary-General for UN DESA here with us for the first half-hour or so.  So we really wanted to be able to maximize his time here.

 I'm very pleased to see so many people here.  This is our second preparatory meeting for IGF 2016.  And happy to see so many people for the open consultation specifically.  And I'm also very hopeful that we have a lot of participants online as well.

 So, as I said, this is our second face-to-face meeting in the preparatory session.  Specifically it's the open consultation day which is when we really want to hear from the community.  So in that sense, I prioritize contributions from non-MAG members.  And they will probably relax that rule fairly significantly for the session this afternoon on the retreat, since that clearly impacts everyone and it's a substantial amount of time.  But for most of the other sessions, I really want to prioritize comments from all the other community participants.

 Our first order of business is adoption of the agenda, which I hope will be up on the screen soon.  It was published a few weeks ago as a draft.  There were some very helpful comments that came in.  The agenda was updated and republished approximately a week ago. 

 We don't have it there. 

 But this morning is actually focused on -- as I said, the first item of business is a welcoming comment from Mr. Wu, Under-Secretary-General.  And then we'll have a welcome from Victor Lagunes, the host country chair for IGF 2016. 

 We then quite quickly go into a briefing on the state of preparations from both the IGF secretariat and the host country, covering workshop proposals, the open forums, dynamic coalitions, other proposals, discussion on the status of the day-zero events, and the main thematic sessions overview.

 And then later in the morning, we'll actually have updates from the best practice forums and the major intersessional project called "Policy options for Connecting and Enabling the Next Billions."  We will conclude the morning with updates from the national and regional IGF initiatives and then the dynamic coalitions.

 And in the afternoon, as I said, we'll come back and have quite a lengthy discussion on the retreat on advancing the ten-year mandate of the IGF.

 We'll then -- we do that for about an hour and a half.  And then we have requests for a series of other briefings from other intergovernmental organizations specifically.  As you know, one of the goals for the IGF is to increase collaboration and participation with many other types of organizations. 

 And we've got five or six requests for specific brief speaking slots to talk about some of their activities and, of course, the floor is open for comments from other stakeholders as well.

 And then we left the last 45 minutes, basically, as an open discussion.  So we can continue on with the retreat discussion or any other topics the community would like to bring up.

 With that, I would love to move for adoption of the agenda, and we'll look to see if there are any comments against.  Seeing none, I call the agenda adopted.  And with that, I would like to introduce Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu.  Thank you.

 >> HONGBO WU:  Ms. Lynn, chairperson of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group, distinguished members of MAG, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, I would like to extend a warm welcome to the Multistakeholder Advisory Group, MAG, of the Internet Governance Forum.  A warm welcome also to IGF community representatives who are here with us at the opening consultations either in person or through remote participation.  Remote participation through Webcasts or live transcript demonstrates IGF's inclusiveness, which is part of the IGF's mandate established in the Tunis Agenda.  I would like to take this opportunity to reaffirm the United Nations' commitment to strengthen the multistakeholder engagement in Internet governance. 

 In this regard, I would also like to applaud the efforts of MAG in seeking to increase participation of all relevant stakeholders, especially from the developing countries.

 Let me take this occasion to say a few words about the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, also known as DESA.  DESA is the secretariat department and headquarters about the mandates for servicing U.N. intergovernmental bodies and the processes such as the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and its functional commissions and expert committees.  Our analytical and capacity-building work covers a range of areas including microeconomic analysis, financing for development, population dynamics, statistics, public administration, social development, and sustainable development. 

 DESA is also the secretariat for many processes including, as many of you recall, the General Assembly, WSIS+10 review last December.  As a headquarter base secretariat's department, DESA is often asked by the Secretary-General to manage and administer support for a number of initiatives of the Secretary himself including the Internet Governance Forum conveyed by the Secretary-General in response to the mandate of the Tunis Agenda.

 One of my predecessors, Mr. Nitin Desai, chaired the MAG meetings face-to-face and helped establish the working modalities of the MAG.  We have helped foster the growth of IGF in the past ten years, and we will continue doing so together with you in the next decade.

 We embarked on the IGF journey together, and we are ready to work with all of you to further strengthen the IGF while continuing to improve its working modalities as called for by WSIS+10.  We are aware that the MAG is by its very nature a diverse community representing different perspectives in my view.  This is a key feature of IGF.

 This diversity can also be reaching as seen in the 260 workshop proposals received for the 2016 IGF featuring 66 topics.  The theme that the MAG proposed for the 2016 IGF, namely, "Enabling Inclusive and Sustainable Growth," is timely and forward looking.  Last year world leaders adopted the 2030 agenda for sustainable development anchored in 17 universal and interconnected sustainable development goals and 169 targets.  As you know, the 2030 agenda underscores that the Internet and information and communication technologies can play enabling roles in implementing the SDGs and the associated targets.

 More specifically, one of the SD targets calls for efforts to significantly increase access to information and communication technologies and strive to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet in least developed countries by 2020.

 Here I would like to draw your attention while we talk about agenda 2030.  We have taken for granted all the targets or goals should be reached by the year 2030.  Still some 40 years away.  However, some of the goals and targets have a deadline in 2020 or 2025 which means we do not have that luxury of a 50 or 40 years.  There is a strong sense of urgency. 

 As it happens, the high-level political forum which is the central platform for follow-up and review of SDGs is taking place here this week and the next.  You're welcome to follow the discussions.  It is also timely that the retreat will be held later this week to explore ways to enrich the IGF.  As a part of the ongoing process in advancing the IGF mandates, the 2016 IGF marks the first IGF following its ten-year renewal by the General Assembly at the WSIS+10 high-level event last year. 

 For the past ten years, MAG members together with the various stakeholders of the IGF community have contributed tremendously to IGF's dialogue process.  Your efforts have made profound impacts on the state of Internet governance today.  We need to think how the IGF can further enhance its role as the global forum for multistakeholder policy discussion on public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance.

 Are we thinking aloud?  What would happen next 50 years?  If you look at agenda 2030, it is the first time that human beings throughout the world realized one reality.  Our current way of consumption, current way of productions are not sustainable.  This is the common ground for reaching consensus by 193 member states of United Nations.  Each has its own domestic priority. 

 So I would imagine it would wonderful if the priority for Internet governance in the next 50 years could have a focus on promotion of the implementation of sustainable development goals.  That would be very significant, and we welcome by the international community as a whole.

 And secondly, if you look back the last 10 years, we have been discussing a lot of issues.  Some of them are very sensitive.  The positions of different stakeholders are really far apart.  Are we repeating the same discussions with no conclusion in sight for the next 10 years?  Is there a better way to do it, to do something meaningful for the international community, for multistakeholders, and for everybody?

 I would say that not all the areas, that we differ.  There are areas, positions and views of various multistakeholders, that are very close to each other.

 Is it possible for us to start with the easy ones, to have some early harvest by producing some policy recommendations to the governments and to the business so we could guide the Internet governance in the next 10 years?

 So just some ideas for the retreat.  I encourage all MAG members and IGF stakeholders to contribute your inputs to guide the retreat discussions.  Any idea or suggestion coming out from the retreat will, in turn, be shared with the broader IGF community for further consultation.

 Ladies and gentlemen, we are less than five months before the 11th IGF meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico.  I'm glad to know that the preparations for this meeting are well underway, joined on good lessons learned from the past IGF meetings.

 The intersessional work of the IGF in various tracks, such as the best practice forum, dynamic coalitions, and the policy note on connecting and enabling the next billion have been well received by the IGF community.

 Here I would like to thank the MAG chair, Lynn, and the MAG members, and also the host country of Mexico for your leadership, commitment, and for the solid preparatory work done so far.

 But I'm also aware that the MAG has very challenging tasks ahead, including the need to evaluate over 260 workshop proposals and 45 open forum proposals, the most that the IGF has ever received.

 I'm confident that you will adopt a balanced approach on the wide array of topics on Internet governance, taking into account the diversity across stakeholder groups, geographical representation, and agenda.

 The remarkable growth of national and regional IGF initiatives also speaks well on the global relevance of the IGF.

 We should explore concrete ways to enhance linkages and the leverage of synergies among them and with the IGF.

 We'd also like to extend capacity development efforts to reach out to those in need.  Let us aim for another great year for the IGF in Mexico in reaching policy dialogue for the Internet to empower sustainable development for all on this shared planet.

 I look forward to your active engagement and a productive outcome. 

 Thank you very much.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Mr. Wu.

 We had thought we would spend the next 10 minutes with a high-level update on the preparations for IGF Mexico, as that was a topic of interest to the under secretary general and then we will come back and hit some of those same topics in a little more depth later.

 So with that, I'd like to introduce Victor Lagunes, who is the honorary host country chair, and he's the chief information officer, the head of unit for innovation and technology strategy, in the office of the president of the Republic of Mexico.

 So Victor, you have the floor.

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

 I'm very fortunate, very thankful, under secretary, to be here presenting the development of all the work that the MAG has been doing.  Thank you, Mr. Masango, as well, and thank you, Madam Chair.

 I would like to first -- I would like to recognize the work of the MAG, and it's been quite an impressive journey so far, and looking into the last months, we still have some way to go yet.  We're feeling very comfortable that this is going to be a very strong and very open governance forum.

 The dates in Mexico have been set.  We're looking into December 6 to December the 9th in the city of Guadalajara.  And as the date approaches, we are definitely considering all the topics from the technical to the human rights. 

 We're very excited to know that the workshops, the number of workshops submitted, has an all-time record, so that means that the interest of continuing the discussion is there, and in countries such as Mexico, this comes -- this cannot come at a better time.

 Mexico has -- it's a country of a little bit more than 120 million people, slightly more than 50% connected.  We're taking strides towards connectivity and bridging that digital divide.  We're a very young country, still, with a median age of 27 years.  We're trying to take advantage of connectivity and really the use of the Internet to give our young the opportunity to be -- to access the global knowledge network.

 Within that, we recognize, as you said, under secretary, that access to ICTs is the great differentiator and also as well as sustainable development goals.  It underlines the relevance and the importance of being connected towards being able to achieve those goals set out in the 2030 agenda.

 We even sent out, in Mexico, the access to Internet as a constitutional right.  This aligns all the different -- the different ecosystem and the multistakeholder ecosystem towards a single goal, which is, give our country the access to Internet.

 Our focus going into the 2016 governance forum is to host an inclusive and focused on sustainable development.  What we want to achieve is really activate our young people and also our industry, as well as the academic and technical sector, in a way that hasn't been done before.

 In a country such as Mexico, the voices are loud, yet the ecosystem is still under development.

 We want to have an open forum, an open discussion, and we believe this forum actually presents the great -- a great opportunity for us to not only strengthen the ecosystem in Mexico, but present a good opportunity for all of us to discuss those topics that are necessary.

 Thank you so much, under secretary.

 [ Applause ]

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  So I'd like to just thank again under secretary general, Mr. Wu, for making some time this morning.  As many of you know, this is a very busy week here at the U.N., with the HLPF and obviously all of its normal activities as well, so we'll just take a moment and thank you again and --

 >>MR. WU: Thank you. 

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR: Thank you.

 Okay.  If you just give us a moment while we get settled here and I guess you just saw the -- one of the interesting elements of having a nongovernmental person as the MAG chair trying to understand U.N. protocol.

 [ Laughter ]

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Okay.  So are we all settled here then?

 Let me just go back to a -- maybe a slightly less breathless pace here for a moment, and before we continue on with the presentations from Victor and then from the IGF secretariat on the preparations for IGF 16, I just want to address a couple of comments I heard with respect to the place cards here in the room.

 I mean, I think they're very nice and they're electronic.  Everybody is seated according to alphabetical order.  There evidently is no way to do anything different unless we take the nametags down entirely, which would certainly allow people to sit where they want to sit, but then we lose what I think is a very great advantage of identification for those that don't know everybody by name and voice.

 So I checked with a few people off line, because they said there was some discomfort with this arrangement.  I leave it to the room.  If the room would prefer not to have the automated place cards and freedom to sit where you'd like, we could certainly do that.  I'd suggest taking a -- kind of a straw poll in a moment.  Or we leave it as it is.  Which, again, there was no ulterior motives here.  It's by alphabetical order.

 So any comments from the floor with respect to that since they said it was quite a point of concern, so...

 And just, again, Chengetai is going to keep the queue.  For those people that are participating on line, Chengetai will be informed when there's an online -- request from an online participant, and those participants are slotted into the queue at the time the request is made.

 It might not always be obvious that there are five, six, seven folks ahead of you in the queue, but we are absolutely not holding those comments to the end.  They are slotted in the queue at the time the request comes in.

 So I'm not sure if Chengetai caught the current queue, but I saw Marilyn, Chip, and Michael.  Marilyn, you have the floor.

 >>MARILYN CADE:  I welcome the opportunity to meet here and thank you, Victor, for the update comments, and also to Under Secretary Wu for his comments. 

 I actually would like to welcome the seating arrangement because it means that we are more widely distributed and probably sitting next to people from other stakeholder groups, rather than sitting with our own stakeholder group.

 So I'm looking at this as a great opportunity to get further acquainted and to create more of a horizontal conversation than a vertical conversation.

 I also just want to reinforce to me the importance of having the names.

 Some MAG members are relatively new, and while this is my third year and I know many of the experienced attendees, I am still meeting the new MAG members and getting acquainted with them and I think that it is important to have the name identification, regardless of whatever, perhaps, innovations we are struggling with.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  I think Chip was next in the queue.

 >>CHIP SHARP: Thank you, Chair.  Yes.  Chip Sharp with Cisco Systems, and I thank you very much for the opportunity to speak and look forward to a good discussion today.

 Might I suggest that for the consultation day, that we have no nametags and no seat reservations, so that we can all kind of sit, you know, at the same level, I think you might say.

 Having the non-MAG members, you know, kind of move to the back of the room is not, you know, conducive to their input, so I'd just like -- I don't propose we do that now because I think it would be too disruptive to get up and move everybody around but maybe in future consultations you consider an alternate arrangement.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Chip. 

 Mike Nelson, you have the floor.

 >>MICHAEL NELSON: (off microphone) -- the thing that Marilyn just said, which is that I really welcome having the nametags.  The only recommendation I would make is that perhaps each of the three days we can shuffle the names around so that different people are in different places so that we maximize the opportunity to talk to different people.  But as somebody who does not memorize names easily, I really appreciate having the names in front of me.

 And I take Chip's point, but I think a lot of us actually prefer to be in the back of the room, which is another reason I'd like to be shuffled around.

 [ Laughter ]

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Michael.  The gentleman in the back of the room, I can't see your name tag.

 >> RICHARD JORDAN:  Thank you.  Richard Jordan from the Royal Academy of Science International Trust.  As someone who has been here at the U.N. every day for 36 years, just let me make a comment about the electronic signage. 

 The electronic signage today reflects more of the science, technology, and innovation forum that was held under the aegis of ECOSOC on June 6th and 7th here in the building.  And it does not mean that member states are all in the front and then programs and agencies and then observers or MAG members. 

 So, actually, this signage reflects more an innovation that the Economic and Social Council has put forth.  Thank you very much.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  I don't see anybody else in the queue, and I think at this point, I'm assuming that people are happy enough with the situation as is, even if they didn't speak up. 

 Chip, if it is really concerning for you, I know there were a couple of MAG members that weren't able to come.  You can certainly come up front and maybe just drape a piece of paper over their name plate and feel like you are more a part of the conversation, if that works for you. 

 Apparently, we can change the name sign if you choose somewhere else.  But I thank everybody for their comments.  And I'm glad we managed to get through that administrivia quite quickly so we can move back to the agenda.

 I think with that, we'll turn to Victor again.  Victor actually has a lengthier update on the preparations for IGF 2016.  We'll go through that, and then we'll actually hear from the IGF secretariat on the preparations as well.

 So for those following online, we're now moving to the agenda Item Number 4. 

 Thank you, Victor.  You have the floor.

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  Madam Chair, I was told the presentation couldn't project.  So is that something we can fix quickly or could we...

 So could we jump into another topic and come back?

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Can you give a verbal update.  Why don't we have Chengetai go first then.

 So Chengetai has volunteered to move the IGF secretariat update forward, and we'll come back to the continuation of the presentation from Mexico.

 Thank you, Chengetai.

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you very much, Chair.

 First of all, just a few housekeeping things.  In the IGF secretariat, we have brought on board three consultants to help with the -- two to help with the best practice forum.  So we have Anri Van der Spuy.  She will be dealing with the gender and access and also connecting the next billion. 

 And then we have Wim over there, and he's dealing with I.P. version 6 and also IXPs, correct?  Right. 

 To my right, we have Anja who is going to be the IGF focal point for national and regional initiatives.  Just wave your hand so people can see you.  Thank you very much.  So we have more staff, and that's good right up to the annual meeting and also for the intersessional work.  Thanks.

 Last night, thank you all for those who did their evaluations.  I think this year we've had the most people -- most MAG members who handed in their evaluations.  I know it's a lot of work.  And especially for some of you it was during a holiday weekend, July 4th.  And thank you very much, doubly thank you for the efforts.  I think we had -- how many?  40?

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  43.

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO: -- 43 MAG members that actually handed in their evaluations which I think is much improved from last year.

 As you know, there were 260 -- roughly 260 proposals.  I sent out an email last night with a breakdown of the proposals and also of the marks.  I won't get into the actual details where we are going to choose the top 65, 85.  We'll leave that for tomorrow for a more in-depth discussion on how we're going to proceed and also for your ideas.  We just give you some time for you to go through the Excel file and also through the PowerPoint presentation that we attached to it.

 But just generally speaking, for the proposals, I'm starting on Slide Number 8 for the general proposals here.  Slide Number 8 just shows you the thematic tags.  This year we did it differently.  Instead of choosing the themes, we said that people can put in thematic tags.  And the highest one was the -- the most chosen was human rights online and then came access and diversity, Internet and ICTs for sustainable development goals going down. 

 For those who aren't MAG members, we are going to put these three slides up on the Web site so you can also view it.  But it wasn't overwhelming majority.  I think 19% -- you can say a fifth of them chose human rights online as a descriptor for their workshop proposal.  And then access and diversity, 15%.  Internet and ICTs for the sustainable development goals was 15.4%.  I won't go all the way down.  You can read them in your own time.

 for the session types, that's slide number 9.  We had a big majority for others, which is 26%, others.  Breakout group discussions was also 20%.  Panel, that's a normal panel, 18%.  Debate, 14%.  And birds of a feather, 13%. 

 I would like to reiterate that for this year, we do have a constraint in how the rooms are shaped, so we can't have that many roundtable discussions.  We can have quasi roundtable discussion room layout but not a full-room table room layout. 

 Depending on the results of the workshop selection process that we're going to do tomorrow and the day after, we'll see how we can assign the workshop to the rooms.  But we should be able to do something.  That shouldn't be that much of a problem.

 For Slide Number 10, we can see that for proposers -- I'm sorry, but we can't really show the slides at the moment but it's fine.  Developed country was 54%; and developing country was 46%, which is also a marked improvement from last year.  So we are making progress in encouraging people from developing countries to propose workshops. 

 And returning, 47%.  So we had first-time proposals is 43%.  So this is first-time new proposals.  Of course, people may try and game the system a little bit and be the second proposers and have the first time in the first proposer.  Still that's fine because the first-time proposers are learning and next year they can propose by themselves.  So it's not actually a bad thing as such.

 And as usual, we have -- civil society is 49%.  So they have the most number of proposals that have been proposed.  And then the technical community is 20%.  Private sector, 10%.  Government is 6%.  And intergovernmental organizations, 5%.  I would hazard a guess in saying that these are an improvement from last year.  The percentages are a little bit of improvement, but the numbers are low.  And we are still trying to encourage government participation in the workshops.  And that's why we are also bringing in the open forums.  

 For the open forums, as we said, we whittled down the open forums to 30 from the -- 44 we had -- 46 we had.  Now we've got it down to 30, and this is mostly governments and intergovernmental organizations to encourage them so that the numbers even out a little bit more.

 We have also the five best practice forums and the seven main sessions that we've put into the current draft schedule that we have at the moment, which we'll be trying to fill out after the selection process has come.

 At the moment, we envision -- this is just to start, of course.  The numbers may drastically change -- after will change slightly depending on what happens in the next two days.  We have 110 workshop proposals we can fit.  So these are 18 90-minute workshop proposals, five 60-minute workshop proposals, and 25 30-minute workshop proposals.  We've taken these numbers from the top 85 or top 65 workshop proposals as they've been graded.  But looking at the data, we may want to make some suggestions and some modifications just so that we have a more balanced number of workshop proposals according to theme and also according to stakeholder group and developed or developing country proposals.

 I think that's all I can say for the proposals.  You have the workshop sheet with the standard deviation and the variance.  We can get into that discussion tomorrow.  That's what tomorrow and the day after is for.

 The other update from the secretariat is we've opened up for the bilateral rooms.  So if you wanted to have a bilateral meeting, please sign up and send an email to the IGF secretariat as the instructions are on the Web site.  And also the village booths, if you want a booth at the village, please send us an email and we'll put you in on the list.  And, remember, it is a first-come, first-served.  So if the room runs out and you haven't sent us an email, then it will be too late.  Thank you very much.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Chengetai.  I think that was an excellent update.

 I think there was one item as well which is that we believe we actually have a room in the venue which would actually support other formats, pop-up groups or some of the other sessions we're looking at that would have the same facilities as all the other workshop rooms.  So I think we need to determine how best to use that and what to do.  That's also work over the next couple of days.  But I think we're all very pleased to hear that we were able to find an extra room that was a proper workshop room and that will have the same streaming facilities and that sort of thing as the other workshop rooms.

 I saw a couple of requests for the floor.  Marilyn and Cheryl are the two that I see.  Again, this is the open community participation day.  So we really do want to hear from those non-MAG members.  I do hate anything that starts a descriptor as a "non."  It's a short way of saying we want to hear from the community other than those that are currently serving as MAG members. 

 With that, Marilyn, you have the floor.  And then Cheryl.

 >>MARILYN CADE: -- some of the non-MAG members to also express questions.

 Two questions.  The first one that I have has to do with flash sessions.  I welcome your mentioning that there's a room where perhaps unusual formats could be taken into account.  There were several flash sessions as well as several birds-of-feather sessions.  And many of the flash sessions were sole speakers or reporting out on research or interesting projects or initiatives that are very worthwhile.  But they certainly do not meet all of the criteria such as providing all views, including all stakeholders, et cetera.

 So I wonder if we might come back and talk about treating those flash sessions uniquely, piloting perhaps putting them in a track, and seeing whether that also relieves us a little bit in our limitation of space.  So that's question number one.

 And then I think question number two, I wanted to see when we would have more information about the flexibility of the room design because many of these workshop proposers took our recommendations to heart and provided very creative formats, including starting with a panel, moving to breakout session, coming back, doing a summing up.  That's takes a lot of flexibility in the room.  And so I would just like to park that for when we might come back and talk about it because when we prioritize these workshops, I think it's unfair to not give someone a slot if our rooms can't accommodate and I think we have to go back to them and offer them a readjustment.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  Those are good points.  We will have more information from the Mexican host as well which will partially answer that question.

 Cheryl, you have the floor.


 [ Laughter ]

 Mic issues.  Thank you, Madam Chair.  I just wanted to thank Chengetai for the update and also to really thank everyone within the community who submitted proposals.  I read through all of them, and I know that is takes a lot of time and effort to put forward new ideas.  And I really appreciate that.  We have so many new people who are contributing and that we have been able to improve some of the developing country participation as well.

 I would encourage folks in the room, who are throughout the community -- and I don't like the word "non-MAG" either -- if there are things that you saw with the process that we could be improving or if there is anything that we could be doing on our part to make it clearer and easier to submit proposals, I would just encourage a dialogue on that or to somehow raise those issues now while you have us all here together.  Thank you.

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Just a slight update on the system.  This is a new system for me as well.  If you want to speak, just indicate on the panel and then it will -- your name will come up here on our panel so that we know which order it is.  And if you press the mic to speak, it will flash green first.  Just wait.  And then it will be red, and then you can speak.  Okay.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  I'm just asking, how do we insert the online participants in?

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I think we will just -- she can just press hers.  Yes.  That would be fine.  Just like I'm doing so she can come in.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  I think -- is Miguel in the queue next?  Still working off the paper here.

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I will get someone to come and help you out.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Okay.  So we don't have anybody else in the queue.  Sorry, there is somebody in the far back.  Could you introduce yourself as well?  I can't see the...

 >>RITU SHARMA: Thank you, Madam Chair.  Ritu Sharma with SDG Nexus and Social Media for Nonprofits.  Thank you for the opportunity to be here and participate.

 I would like to propose to the MAG Internet Governance Forum to consider an opportunity for the first-time attendees, people of color, women, and traditionally underrepresented people, to participate at the conference if you have a space available in an un-conferenced format where they can potentially identify and nominate a session there. 

 The rigorous submission process can be daunting for some people and they may not have the confidence and the knowledge to feel empowered to come forward and say, "I want to speak and I can pull it off," but if you have -- if you have some sort of mechanism for moderating where you have expert moderators available and you encourage people who haven't spoken and sort of primarily first-time speakers who have never spoken at the conference before and make an open invitation, "If you have expertise in this area, we will have moderators supporting you, helping you," I think you'll have a greater diversity of voices. 

 Because in the last six months that I've been engaged in this community, from WSIS forum to ITU forums here to ISOC, ICANN, everywhere, it's the same people speaking, speaking extensively, and at the expense of an opportunity for underrepresented voices to have the confidence and preparation to represent themselves and their voices.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  We have Nigel in the queue, and I think after Nigel speaks -- these are all good comments.  I think they would also be helped if we were informed a bit more on the specific venue and some of the other considerations for the Mexico IGF, so after Nigel's comments, we'll return back to Victor.  Thank you.

 >>NIGEL HICKSON:  Good afternoon -- ah.

 [ Laughter ]

 >>NIGEL HICKSON:  Good morning.  Nigel Hickson from ICANN.  First of all, thank you very much for the invitation to attend this open consultation session and I think I've mastered the technology, but not sure.

 The comment I had was in relation to the excellent response that we had in terms of the workshop proposals.  It's great to see such a diverse range of applications for workshops.  But I think it would be very useful, indeed, to be able to discuss this in more detail and I'm hopeful that we might have some time on our agenda when both the MAG participants, which of course have done all the work on this -- not necessarily the work in applying but certainly the work in assessing, which I'm sure must have been a resourceful issue -- if we can have a discussion with both the MAG members and the non-MAG members to better understand how this assessment is carried out and the sort of things that are being looked at.

 Because I think there is a great deal of opportunities which I think we can perhaps discuss also this afternoon when we look at the wider strategies that are going to be discussed at the retreat and how we can broaden the participation of the IGF in terms of the people that take part, whether it's virtually or in -- physically in the annual sessions.

 Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Nigel.

 Before we turn to Victor, maybe we could move to a terminology which is "community" or "community member," and if somebody's -- obviously MAG members are part of the community as well, but if you're speaking in a MAG member role, identify yourself as a MAG member, and maybe we can get away from the non-terminology that way.

 So with that, Victor?

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  Thank you, Madam Chair.

 Very happy to share with you the progress that we've been making within the venue.

 As I mentioned before, a very challenging one, yet we strongly believe it's the right one to host such an event.

 An historical building, UNESCO heritage building, that's made very interesting challenges for us to deploy even the engineering side all the way into the audio conferencing and video, yet we are complying with all the requirements from UN DESA and from -- to host the IGF.

 I take into account, Marilyn, your comments around the flexibility of the rooms.  We'll try to put that into perspective and make that venue work.

 I'm going to blaze through the slides in a swiftly manner.  We put a lot of photographs for you to actually start living the venue itself, seeing the place, and of course giving ourselves the opportunity to put forward more feedback around the type of layouts that you would like to see within the venue.

 Go ahead, please.

 So we're not only going to be using the inside of the venue itself, but it's actually located within a very big square, so we're going to tent -- we're going to build a tent in front of it, so in that square that you're actually seeing, we're going to build a tent for the lunches and for -- to build the entrance.

 If you want, Yolanda, you can -- you can skip every 5 or 10 seconds the pictures, because there's a ton of them and I don't want to linger too much on some of them. 

 We took into account the room requirements and we're complying fully, yet of course the venue itself is not a conference center.  It's an historical building.

 So with that, I really ask from you your sensitivity around, you know, the type of space -- the type of spot, the type of place, and what we can do with it.

 Within that, it's actually quite a big venue and we're making the best use of it.

 >> (Off microphone.)

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  Yeah.  I know.  It's not sliding.  That's fine.

 What we can do is -- I apologize for this, but we can share the layout and actually share with you the -- how we're building the place from bottom up.

 We're going to have some -- for example, on the main stage, it's going to be flexible, so we're going to do the opening and the closing ceremonies to host around 2,000 people.  Then we'll actually change into a smaller session group.

 >> (Off microphone.)

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  We're back?  It's good?  Thank you, Yolanda.

 Go forward, please.

 So those are the requirements, as I mentioned, and hopefully you're able to see, on the next slides --

 So it's very -- it's a little bit difficult to see from the slide, yet on your left you see the entrance, and on there, we're actually building the tent to have additional flex space, more so to -- to be able to host sponsors and sponsor events.

 We're really trying to activate the industry in a different way, meaning it's a challenge, as you would imagine, to invite sponsors and then don't open the place for branding.

 Within that, we're already in talks with most of the global ISPs companies or most of the global telcos.  They're very interested and they've made themselves -- they potentially accept -- or they accepted in- -- the invitation.  So we're working towards that.

 One comment.  We've finalized the funding from the government side, so we're quite happy with that.  More so in these times.  You know, Mexican government has taken a hit budget-wise because of oil prices, so I just mention it like that because it's taken, you know, triple time the work just to be able to fund from the government side. 

 Now, the next steps is actually to build the sponsorship program, to invite the industry to be really active into that, so what we're doing here is not only, of course, having the normal, I guess, presence from the industry but select some of the venues in neighboring buildings to be able to open those for the industry to present their cases and of course to share with us what they're doing around Internet development.

 So of course you've seen what Google and, you know, companies such as AT&T has done before.  We would actually -- we are seeing more of an active engagement within the industry that will not, of course, overlap with the agenda that we're setting up towards -- for the IGF.

 All right.  We're -- as I mentioned, we're making use of this square as a flex-type space, so on your left, you'll see on the red side the tent that we are going to be building there, so that will become the entrance and that's where the village is going to be hosted, as well as the food court.

 So I give good news but I also like to advance on some not good news, but we haven't been able to secure free food yet.  We're working very hard, as I say, but -- and it's in our best, of course, interest to be able to provide us with food within this spot.

 Nonetheless, it's going to be very, very cost-efficient to be able to stay within the venue, don't move around that much, but of course as you would imagine, everything -- every peso or every dollar of cost, we're very sensitive around that.

 That's the main entrance to the building, and we're proposing the MAG have a slightly different registration process.  Of course we're inviting ourselves to preregister so we can actually preprint the accreditation IDs and the packages and we'll have them ready to go. 

 The experience that we have in many events, even IGFs, is that of course in the first four hours or three hours of the event there's a big bottleneck, but really the registration or the entrance is not used that much afterwards.

 We would like to focus a lot on those hours via some newer accreditation and printing mechanisms.  We'll be testing those out and of course asking for your feedback as to how you see this happening in the most efficient way.

 Of course it has to -- this has to be approved by the U.N.'s security detail.

 So you can see the village area.  Once getting into the building, the venue, there's the registration, so you -- we're already inside the building itself.

 Now, we're very -- the building from the inside, on the first day we can actually get lost.  It's big and it looks the same, we call it.  So the east wing or the west wing, it actually looks exactly -- it's like the same.  It's very symmetrical.  So we're putting a lot of signage around the place and also for inclusiveness with Braille signage as well.

 We're going to be putting some signage on the floors.

 This is the main conference area, so it will -- on the opening and closing as I mentioned, it's going to be -- it could host up to 2,000 people, and that's an actual photograph of a similar event hosted just last year. 

 We're going to be putting some cover.  Mexico is a strange country.  It's really monsoon country, so it doesn't matter rain season.  It's all year long.  So even though the weather is actually quite -- quite warm and quite nice, it could actually rain at any moment so we cannot avoid that.

 That's the main -- proposal for the main conference hall.  The layout could change, so please don't -- so we would like to put a bigger screen, of course, to allow more things to be projected, and this one can actually -- will actually change into the main meeting room shortly afterwards.

 So as you can see, we're trying to make the best use of the space, and of course without compromising the content itself.

 Within the museum section, we build the bilaterals.  We believe it's actually going to be gorgeous.  We're thinking about putting an exposition or an exhibition at the same time, so we'll be able to hold bilaterals at the same time as enjoying some contemporary and historical Mexican art.

 So on the orange, on the top left, you'll see the bilateral meeting rooms.

 Each of these hosts different size rooms, from 16, 24, 39, 40, and 47.

 I deeply apologize because we should have put the U.N.'s flag, yet my team put the U.S. flag instead, so --

 [ Laughter ]

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  -- Mr. Masango already mentioned that, and of course he's right, as always.

 [ Laughter ]

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  There will be a lot of U.N. flags and things everywhere.

 [ Laughter ]

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  It has some patios throughout, so we're going to be using those for workshops.  Go ahead, please.

 And of course accommodating different size rooms. 

 So as you can see, the layout is not the best one, and I say it with those words, yet the venue itself will present a very good opportunity for us to blend what we -- what we perceive, you know, the historical with the new.

 Nonetheless, we're going to be able to hold all the IGF requirements for those rooms.  The acoustics, we're working on that.  We've already tested some of the rooms, so -- so that we can absorb some of that echo.

 Nonetheless, there -- it's actually quite big, so it's not going to be a noise pollution in between the rooms, that we know.

 To the media center.

 So media center, we're really thinking about to use this place either for press or also to be able to sit down and see everything that's happening in the concurrent meetings and select from different audios.

 So we're going to -- our idea here is to have all the screens that are from the -- so from CCTV and being able to select audio.

 Of course the press can actually be here.

 We've used this format in many of our international events and it's worked very well so far.

 Coffee throughout.  Very important.

 [ Laughter ]

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  And that's going to be complimentary.  Coffee and...

 So as you can see, in summary, the venue itself, it's beautiful.  We're very proud to be able to have the opportunity to use it to host it and to -- in this international event.

 We believe it's even -- it presents a bigger case than even a conference room because it's a big differentiator, but really in here, my ask is for your feedback as to how we can make the most out of this layout.

 With that, I return it to you, Madam Chair.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Victor.  We have a few people in the queue, and I think we should save this for any sort of specific comments here.  And then if we need additional, more specific information, we can perhaps get that offline, share it, so we have it in advance of our more detailed discussions tomorrow morning.

 But, Peter, you have the floor.

 >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Thank you, Victor, for the update.  Two quick point.  One, I just want to encourage you in the statement you made in your opening comment about using the meeting to enhance the local community activities.  The voices are strong, but there's a lot of development work. 

 I've had a long relationship with ICANN which deliberately positions its meeting around the world to do just that, to bring Internet governance issues to communities against some opposition from -- some members of the community thought the meetings might be better if they were constantly hosted in major centers.  But we found over the years that the advantages to the communities where the meetings go.  So I want to encourage that, too.  It will work if you can do that.  There are advantages from having that. 

 And to offer any kind of help that you need with that.  One of the things that, again, looking at the ICANN experience, the chairman, the CEO, luminaries from the technical and business and intellectual property and social civil society members that come to those meetings are used to go and give presentations, talks, et cetera, in the local community.  And if we can help do that so we don't just all come and go to the meeting, then go home.  If there's other contributions that people can make in the community, I'm sure you'll find people are very willing to do that.

 The second point is one of the things IGF's done, I think, is establish a very high bar with some of its programs, like the meeting, the agenda, and keeping track of the sessions.  Can we add to that and move to a GPS or near-field technology, particularly if you have a region -- a space that's confusing.  There are developing software programs for conferences where members can find out where to go, what's happening near them.  The GPS and near-field technology is available. 

 Can you look at those sorts of programs?  They are very helpful not just for the people attending the conference, finding their way around.  They're also very helpful to the organizers.  You get records that track where people went, how long they stood.  There's useful organizing data as well.  If you could look at some of that software, it's available.  You can get it for conferences.  And if you have got a venue which is confusing, it might be a big help.

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  Definitely.  So I appreciate your willingness to support.  Of course, I recognize ICANN's role globally and the way they set up their conferences is definitely a best practice.

 Within that, of course, we not only welcome the support but also my ask here is in different ICANN meetings -- incoming one from Helsinki, we were active there -- to be able to bring the Mexican IGF story and be able to invite more and more people, really engage more.

 The way that we are looking at really giving ourselves more of a value -- value prop around the use of technologies, we're developing an application for the venue itself, for the event itself.

 Of course, we're hopeful that it can include NFC.  If not, I think WiFi would be able to give us a lot of that value.

 Also, what we have seen is a lot of consumption for live stream, even within the venue itself, which actually consumes a lot of the bandwidth which you can get.  I used to say that if you get 10 gigs, 10 gigs will be used.  So in this case, we're thinking ahead, trying to set up in-house CDNs, content distribution networks, so we will be able to -- even from the app itself, be able to see what's happening in other places, in other meetings, workshops, without going to Internet and back because that definitely would choke the bandwidth.  So we're thinking about all these things.

 The other project that I would like to mention just because we're very conscious around the use of the budget and the budget towards the event itself, is that we're thinking of the infrastructure built towards the event.  It's going to be a permanent infrastructure to the venue itself.  So we're going to be tendering that to a potential sponsor to really deploy a state-of-the-art WiFi network that not only serves, you know, for those four or five days but can actually serve for the longer term.  This will allow us to actually deploy a bigger, stronger WiFi network and really think about what else can we do with that infrastructure.

 Thank you, Peter.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  We actually have about four or five people in the queue.  And if these questions are specific to kind of MAG responsibility for doing the workshop in terms of venue, I would actually request that we keep those to tomorrow and we maximize the open consultation time on issues that really are in front of the community.

 I also need to apologize to Douglas because he's been in the queue as an online participant, but Chengetai and are trying to work out a system here to merge the online and the -- this speaker system here in front of us. 

 Douglas, you have the floor and we will come back to the few people in the queue.

 >> ANJA GENGO:  I'm sorry.  It seems Douglas is not connected to audio.  Maybe I can ask to type in the chat and then I can read it.  Can you give me two minutes?

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Douglas is going to put his comments into chat, and Anja will read them out in which case, I'm going to the queue.  I have seen a few people raise their hands.  But you should try and do that through the system here so he weave everybody in. 

 I have Cheryl in the queue just now.

 >>CHERYL MILLER:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Thank you for the presentation.  I had a specific question because I was a little bit confused.  I know the word "sponsorship" was used.  I don't know that IGF has had sponsorships in the past.  I know companies contribute to the trust fund and really try to prioritize that to make sure that we keep the trust fund healthy.  There are a number of donors in the room.

 So I just wanted to better understand because I was looking at the brochure, and it looks as though you have to pay to go to the gala.  I don't know.  Has the secretariat changed the whole format of the meeting where now you have to pay to attend certain things or have certain speaking slots and things?  I'm newer than most people, but I have never seen that done before.  So anything that you could clarify on that would be appreciated.  Thanks.

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  All the meetings are of a noncommercial nature, so you can't sell workshop slots or whatever.  I mean, the only thing you can sell inside is, basically, food and drink.

 But that's within the U.N. territory, within the venue -- within the U.N. security perimeter.  Let's put it that way.

 Whatever happens in the sovereign territory of Mexico is up to them.  But for our purposes, nothing commercial goes on within the U.N. security perimeter.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Cheryl, you have a follow-up?

 According to my screen here, it has just put you at the bottom of the queue.  I guess it you turn your mic off, I guess there is no immediate follow-up.

 >>CHERYL MILLER:  Okay.  It just came on.

 I guess then just as a follow-up, just so I understand, so then the gala is open to all.  So day-zero events -- I mean, you're not selling speaking slots for that?  Like, I think that's my question.  I don't know if you answered it fully or not.  Or I don't know...

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Everything controlled by the secretariat is of noncommercial.  So all the workshops, or the GigaNet or whatever happens there, nothing is being sold.

 Where people -- I think there's no preferential treatment at all within anything that's organized by the United Nations.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Chengetai and Cheryl.

 Jim, you're in the queue.

 So it happens when you indicate that you want to be in, your lights turn green on your microphone.  And then they should turn red, I'm guessing, trying to find the pattern sitting up here.

 Can somebody actually help Jim with the mic?

 >>JIM PRENDERGAST:  Ah, there we go.  Thank you very much, Chair.  Jim Prendergast with The Galway Strategy Group.  You talked about the registration process.  My experience has been that the registration process itself has actually gone fairly smoothly.  It's the security getting into the venue.  And I don't think anybody at the dais or in the room has control over that.

 But I would ask that we communicate to those who do to have more than four metal detectors for a crowd of over 4,000 people, three of which are only available general attendees and one is dedicated to VIPs.  I think that was a serious chokepoint last year. 

 Hopefully we would -- as a pasty white person standing in the sun for that long, it was quite difficult.

 Secondarily, just to pick up on a point earlier and to relay a story to those who are new to the IGF and to the MAG, I do like the idea of having a multipurpose room, so to speak, for new and innovative sort of formats that could be decided on the spot.  If you go back to the IGF that was held in Nairobi several years ago, there's a story told of a workshop that didn't happen because the organizers didn't actually show up to the room.  Yet, it turned out to be one of the most innovative, engaging, and exciting workshops because the people who did show up for the workshop in the room sort of made it happen on their own.

 So I think that's a lesson to build on and certainly would look forward to that type of outlet for folks who want to organize on the go.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Jim.

 I'd like to close the queue with the remaining three speakers that are here and then move on to the next item so we ensure that we get to activities during the IGF week.

 So I have -- unfortunately it's just listed as Access Now, and I can't actually see who that is in the room.  So if you would take the floor and introduce yourself.

 >> NICK DAGOSTINO:  Hi there.  Thank you.  Nick Dagostino from Access Now. 

 I just want to start off by saying I really admire the selection of the venue that reflects the kind of cultural heritage and the character of the host country.  I mean, the Internet is a very globally diverse place.  And so I think the venues of the IGF should reflect that.  So I think that's really great.

 Given the fact that 20% of the proposals that were sent in were breakout group discussions and another 25% were others, I would ask the MAG to consider this when selecting and accepting workshops to kind of look at what rooms are available and what sessions really flourish in the formats of the rooms that are available to them.

 I think that there's a really good chance to really accept a lot of more innovative formats which is what -- through the process of the workshop proposal system this year was encouraging.  So I would like that to be continued throughout the whole process and acceptance.

 And, lastly, I think in terms of the registration process, I just want to echo what the gentleman earlier said about the main kink point is generally in, like, the security.  And as somebody who worked IGF registration in the past, I think that one of the -- that's generally the main sort of kink point, is through the security and not necessarily on the printing of the registration process.  Thank you very much.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Nick.  One of the -- my next speaker is Number 83.  Now, I have no idea who 83 is, and I am assuming 83 doesn't know who 83 is either.  If your mic has just turned red --

 >>ZAHID JAMIL:  It just went red, so it must be me.  Hi, Zahid Jamil from Pakistan, business law firm.  I just had a question.  I think it's -- seeing that a developing country like Mexico stepping forward to do this, it's hosted many other events like ICANN and others before.  So I'm really grateful to the Mexican government to do that.  Especially the venue also looks like an interesting venue, especially focusing on the culture and diversity that exists in Mexico.

 But I had some questions about the sponsorship information that's circulating.  What we received as packages is that apparently you will have dinner slots.  You need to buy dinner slots for three people or two people if you want to have it -- that's what the brochure says.  And there's a branded bus process outside.  And there's a speaking panel on day zero.  And so I was a little confused about which aspects are going to be part of the -- sort of, as the secretariat described, would be inside and not branded and ones outside might be branded.

 And what it raises a question about is:  Does that create two competing markets for sponsors:  One who wish to give money to the trust and not be branded and not be seen versus an opportunity for sponsorship outside a certain parameter?  To some extent, I think many of the sponsors may choose to do the other and not the first.  And creating that competition between the two -- I think we always have tried to promote funding the trust fund as opposed to some other things.  So getting some clarification on how that's going to work would be helpful because I think at the end of the day, some businesses are going to ask why would I contribute to a trust fund when I can get better visibility on the infrastructure.  Outside I can have the branded bus and everything else.  So some clarification would be helpful.  Thank you.

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  Thank you for your question.  I think it follows Cheryl's comment and question as well.  So the basis for the packages that we built really came from the perspective that the government could not sponsor it all, not because we as government couldn't afford it because -- and we cannot.  But the reality is being a stakeholder event, we thought it has to be a multistakeholder approach into everything.

 Now -- so we're asking for support.  Yes, it's framed in a sponsorship package because we need to sell it down that way.  But we have the perspective to really activate the industry in a different way.  We know the global players.  We know they are interested in supporting the trust.  We know who they are.  We know who they bring.  And that won't change.  That's part of the MAG itself.  That's part of even the way that they are interested in contributing towards the MAG.

 Our effort towards day zero is really to bring in not only high-level ministerial people that we are used to seeing in day-zero events, we would like to bring in as well high-level industry specialists as well. 

 The way that we've been able to do so before is with a lot of caution around brand usage and a lot of effort into really what those companies think around Internet development and employment and so on.  So you are familiar with Facebook's  There is one project that's an answer towards certain gaps that they see.  And if they're interested, they can come and share with us their experiences.  You've seen what Google does as well in terms of not only sponsoring or supporting the event itself, but they have spin-off events or cocktails later on that they bring in where they can bring in the usual suspect/Vint Cerf to let us know how the Internet is developing.

 So I don't -- we don't see it as a competing mechanism.  We see it as enriching and also activating the regional and national landscape.  We usually don't see the local players.  And by "local," I mean, for example America Movil, which is one of the largest communications company on the planet, owned by one of the wealthiest people on the planet who also is Mexican.  But they are not active in the conversation itself.  So we are making those inroads. 

 And we have been today successful in approaching those companies and really activating the conversation because Mexico really needs that debate to happen nationally and regionally.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Maybe you can try turning your mic on and off again.  Looks like we're losing an awful lot of time to a sophisticated mic system.

 >>ZAHID JAMIL: Oh, okay.  Just -- just a quick follow-up and I know we've lost time already.  There's a difference, I guess, between corporate events which corporate companies can host versus branded events which are sponsored events which is where a government or some other group is having an event that has been sponsored.  I think that distinction is very important.  And I do think that still the multistakeholder model would require priority and here it seems like then sponsors will get priority, which is not necessarily multistakeholder.  I mean, I could be wrong but it's just some thoughts that are churning.  Thank you.

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  Yeah.  That's not the case.  Really, the agenda will be set here.  The -- and you'll have complete visibility.

 The other parties, we're really asking for support from the industry because we believe it's definitely valuable. 

 Am I getting an echo or someone else?

 >> (Off microphone.)

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  Still, you'll have -- even if you want to, you'll have -- we can share with you the percentages in which we're contributing towards the event itself.  I don't know if that will help alleviate your concern, in a way, but we've been very, I guess, conscious around how much should government even contribute towards this event.

 And not only because we're hesitant to do so but also because in events of this nature, if we try to overreach as government, we get a backlash from civil society groups and so on that we're doing too much.  I don't know if I'm being blunt enough, but -- or candid enough, but the reality is that we should only do so much and then everything from of course what you're familiar with, which is the agenda creation, all the way into how we interact with the industry should be said -- we perceive should be said in that way.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Just one comment as well.  In the last MAG meeting, we did agree that the MAG would actually see the list of open forums as well, to ensure that they were complementary, and that was based on some experiences we had last year.

 That call for open forums is still open and as I understand it actually remains open for quite some time, but we will check in on it periodically which would also perhaps be another step to reassure some of the folks here based on the comments.

 I have four people left in the queue and then we're going to move to the next session so we can get through.

 I have Marilyn Cade, number 131, Ginger, who is on line, and Zeina, and we're closing it with Zeina.  Thank you.

 >>MARILYN CADE:  Thank you.  Thank you, Chair.

 I'm just going to speak very quickly.  My name is Marilyn Cade.  I'm going to speak very quickly about some of the things that have happened in the past because I think if you haven't attended all of the IGFs and sat through all of the planning some things may appear to be very new. 

 Let me, first of all, thank the Mexican government host for all the work that you're doing and for the innovation that you're showing in reaching out to the multistakeholder community to develop the necessary support.

 First of all, just to remind everyone that although free food was introduced for some of the IGFs, it has not been at all of the IGFs.  One thing to think about might be not having free food but having a number of concession stands where people could bring food in and sell it, and I think most of us would respect that and be happy to pay for a sandwich or water, et cetera, and that might move the issue of free food aside.

 A second thing I'll just remind everyone of is we were hosted in Europe not that many years ago and the buses were scheduled but not paid for and if you took the bus you bought a ticket.  Not a big deal but it meant that that relieved the host country from having to prepay a lot of money to buses.

 I will also just say that in another meeting I've gone to from an IGO, there was also an effort to do a special deal with taxis, to have a special fee.  You could prepurchase tickets for taxis and pick them up at your hotel when you checked in, so that also reduced some of the costs.  The attendees bore the costs but they were also getting a special discount.

 Finally, I'll just remind all of us that we did go to an IGF not that many years ago which was funded largely by stakeholder contributions.  Some quite significant.  They were not in any way viewed as being given special attention, and they were -- they came together to support what the local community could provide and we had a very successful IGF and I know this one will be as well.  Thank you.

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes.  I'd just like to underline that the -- free food is not a requirement.  Transport -- paid -- I mean, free transportation is not a requirement.  It's just that the government should ensure that there is adequate transportation to and from the venue.  Because here we are in New York, it's just the same type of rules.  We pay for our transportation to come here and back to our hotel.  Yes.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  Those are good points.

 The next speaker in the queue, with apologies, is number 131, and I can't see a lit mic, so I don't know who that was.  Did --

 >> (Off microphone.)

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Marilia?

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Marilia.  Yes.  Your mic is red.

 >>MARILIA MACIEL: Thank you, Lynn.  Not working?  Thank you.  So I just would like to say that I do appreciate the attempt to clarify the commercial signs in the venue, but another point that I think is very important is public demonstrations of opinions, and I'm sure that you remember in the last IGF there was a group of civil society activists that conducted a public protest, a peaceful one, and the signs were torn apart and there are report -- concerning reports that they were henceforth monitored or forbidden to access the venue and this is very concerning. 

 I believe that for next year something that maybe we should look into is to have a clear policy that is made available and clear for IGF participants, and if demonstrations like this happen again -- it sometimes is very hard to control them on the ground -- that U.N. personnel is instructed how to react properly and not in an exaggerated manner to these demonstrations, so we can preserve freedom of opinion and expression of IGF participants.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Marilia.  We have Ginger in the queue?

 >> Ginger, can you try and speak now?

 >>VIRGINIA PAQUE:  Good morning.  This is Ginger Paque.  I'm a MAG member from civil society.  I'm -- can you hear me?  I am speaking.  Can you -- I'm hoping you can hear me.

 >> We can hear you, Ginger.

 >>VIRGINIA PAQUE:  I do not see the captioning capturing me, so I am not sure.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  We can hear you, Ginger.

 >>VIRGINIA PAQUE:  Okay.  I am confirming now that you can hear me.  This is Ginger Paque from civil society.

 I consider myself as representing the Americas.  That includes South America, Central America, and North America, with all of our mixed priorities but really a multiregional effort for inclusion and access. 

 And with that, I would like to express my appreciation for the efforts being made to include online participation.  I know it has not been easy for you this morning, and we -- it is indispensable and we do appreciate it.

 I very much appreciate the host country's efforts and the explanations that we've been getting of what's being planned.  This is very important as we prepare.  And in the spirit of the inclusion and access and in the spirit of what Ritu said earlier this morning, Ritu Sharma, about underserved and underrepresented groups, including newcomers who do not have always the support of established groups or colleagues who have been already in the venue, I really think we need to emphasize a space in -- a large booth in the Village Square for a newcomers and information booth.  I'd like to see full discussion on this and I think it's an important point for people who do not have a way to join in, exchange ideas, and get support for being involved and for the voices that are not being heard and don't have support to group together and get organization and groups.

 So I would like to ask that we please discuss and firmly commit to a newcomers or information booth and center.  This may take care of some of the problems with alternative voices as well.

 Thank you very much.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Ginger.  That's a very important point.

 Zeina, you have the floor.

 >>ZEINA BOU HARB: Hello.  Good morning.  This is Zeina Bou Harb from Lebanon.  I'm a MAG member.  I would like to ask Victor two questions because in the previous meeting we mentioned a mobile app regarding the forum this year and we mentioned the -- we discussed the possibility of launching a social media competition to encourage the youth to get involved with the -- with governance issues.  This is one question.  I would like to know if you are considering this, as the host country.

 And my other suggestion is based on our experience in the Arab IGF, we established booths on the -- in the airport two, three days before the start of the meeting so whenever people from abroad are coming, they can collect their badges at the airport, or even sometimes we send them the eBadge with the QR code, they can print it and bring it along with them.  It will facilitate too much from the burden you will face at the registration desk.  Thank you.

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Yes.  Unfortunately, the U.N. registration is tightly controlled by the U.N. security, so, I mean, Victor has his proposal.  We have to pass it through the U.N. security.  They really like -- before they issue a badge, they really want to check your ID and your particulars.  It's just the security protocol that they follow, so it's going to be a bit difficult.  We are trying to modernize them but we'll see how it goes.  Yeah.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  I had tried -- apparently unsuccessfully -- to close the queue after Zeina some time ago.  I have three speakers left.  We're sort of significantly behind in the agenda.  I will give the floor to the three speakers but really ask you to be fairly succinct in your comments so we can move on to updates on -- from best practice forums and the connecting and enabling the next billion.

 So with that, ICANN, Nigel, you have the floor.

 >>NIGEL HICKSON:  Aha.  It's gone red!  I'm getting there.

 What it is, Madam Chair -- and where I come from, it's green usually that signifies go and red stop, but I know that's rather...

 [ Laughter ]

 >>NIGEL HICKSON:  Not the case everywhere.

 So just very briefly -- and thank you for the opportunity and thank you, Victor, for that -- for the outline of what's going to take place in Guadalajara.  Certainly I'm very excited to be able to return to Guadalajara again.  It's going to be a great opportunity.

 On the discussion we just had about events that are sponsored or not -- and I appreciate that this has to be a multistakeholder approach, as you rightly said, and it's only right that people should contribute and I think -- I think Marilyn got it quite right.  No one minds paying for dinners and buses and things like that.

 The only thing I would say -- and perhaps this has already been clarified -- that in terms of the day zero agenda, I know that you've kindly asked for -- if you like, for ideas and contributions on what might take place on the day zero and for ideas and we'll, as ICANN, certainly be putting in a contribution to hold a discussion on the IANA transition.  And I think one would hope that that agenda itself is not linked to the sponsorship. 

 Obviously, there might well be side events, as has happened at other IGFs, which are sponsored, and of course that's absolutely up to you, but it would be nice to know that the -- that the day zero agenda, as such, is -- can be applied for on the basis of sort of merit and interest, which of course is up to you entirely on what is considered to be meritorious.  Thank you very much indeed.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Nigel, just a quick clarification.  The day zero event will be on -- it is always manage between the host secretariat and the host country.  It will be on the basis of merit.  And things such as the ICANN workshop or the GigaNet worships, et cetera, will have no relationship, no impact to anything the Mexican hosts might do with respect to any of the other events on day zero.  I think I can say that quite unequivocally and Victor is shaking his head.

 The last two people in the queue, I'm sorry again, the numbers are number 82 and 129.  Both your mics are green.  I don't know which one is the next one in order, and I'm afraid that will mess up the system, but since yours just turned red, sir, I guess you were the next one in.

 >>MARCEL LEONARDI: Yes.  So hi, hello.  I'm Marcel from Google and I'd just like to clarify that Google is and has always been a major supporter of the IGF through the financial support that we give to the trust fund, through the robust participation of Googlers themselves in the wide range of panels, and to stipends to civil society across the world, but just to clarify, all of the side events, all the extra stuff that Google does or does not do at the IGFs in general has nothing to do with sponsorship packages or any kind of extra payments to the host country or anywhere else for that matter.  It's just something paid by Google itself.  I just wanted to clarify that because it's a different way of putting things.  I don't want people to think that in the past Google has paid anything extra or different for hosting those extra side events.  Thank you.

 >>VICTOR LAGUNES:  I completely agree with you, and of course hosting the side event has -- you know, Google invested some money into doing so.

 What we are attempting to do this time is to collaborate within that format.  So these side events will happen.  What we're doing is presenting the industry with some options so that these side events can happen in a better way, in a more -- in a more valuable way, if I can say so that way. 

 There are, for example, many venues, neighboring venues, as I mentioned, that will not be -- any company would not have any access without government support.  So we're doing that in a way that we can collaborate with the industry and the industry actually sees that valuable.

 We have been in conversations with Google already at the public policy level, so -- at the OECD meeting, and they have expressed their interest into contributing in such a manner.

 Just one clarification.

 The branding will not be in any way inside the venue.  On that, we will continue to keep the spirit into -- that the IGF has had.  We have no interest and no -- into tampering with that, but we like to strengthen of course the surrounding area so we can do so that way. 

 Zeina, very quickly, yes to the mobile app and yes towards engaging more youth through the use of social media for capacity building, so we can talk more about that.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  I've just been given another update on the system here, and in order to help the mics work properly, I need to announce the speaker specifically as is marked on your sign, so, for instance, if ICANN has asked for the floor and I know it's Nigel, I should not identify him as Nigel but as ICANN because that is what's marked as the placard in front of him.  So maybe that will help speed some things up.  So I now have number 129 in the queue and I know that's Lori but 129, you have the floor.

 >>LORI SCHULMAN:  Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the MAG.  I'm Lori Schulman from the International Trademark Association. 

 I'm following up with a suggestion on welcoming newcomers and perhaps embracing those who may not be as vocal or as active as perhaps some of us are in other venues, and I would strongly recommend and consider a mentoring program.

 I envision this where you could have a sign-up desk with newcomers who come in and say they'd like to be paired with a mentor, at least for the first day, to learn the ropes, and then have people more veteran sign up as volunteer mentors.  It could be done smoothly, very easily, and I think it would foster a lot of good conversation.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Lori.  I would like to thank this opportunity to thank Mexico for everything they're doing.  I think it's going to be a really exciting and energetic conference with a lot of energy based on some of the things we're seeing in the proposals and here from the MAG.  I think it's an absolutely beautiful place.  And Victor and Yolanda have worked very, very hard to meet all of the requirements and, in fact, go beyond in many ways.  So I'm very much looking forward to a really successful IGF there.  And thank you.

 [ Applause ]

 The next item are updates from the IGF best practice forums, and then I suppose we go to the IGF policy options for connecting and enabling the next billion.  So, I'm not sure who is prepared to speak the updates from the BPFs.  Is that the secretariat or is that some of the...

 So, Michael Nelson, you have the floor.  Izumi.

 >>MICHAEL NELSON:  Just very briefly, the best practices forum on Internet transparency and the fight against corruption is finally getting going.  We had a useful conference call about a week ago.  Had a critical mass of about nine people, including a couple of experts from outside of MAG community, outside of the Internet governance community.  One of them from Access Now.  We've also had someone from OECD quite interested in and are reaching out to Transparency International.

 We are on the third draft of our mission statement, and we'll get a new version out probably tonight.  And we plan to have an informal luncheon discussion on Thursday to finalize this and to also continue our outreach to the people who are engaged.  There's a lot of interest, and I think we have a pretty clear agenda on what we want to do.  So I thank everyone for their support. 

 And anyone who wants to talk, come and find me.  We're also setting up a listserv so people can sign up for and be part of the conversation.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Michael.

 All the best practice forums and DCs, there's information on the Web site for all of these.  So people who are interested in following or participating, you can find the necessary information there as well.

 Izumi, you have the floor.

 >>IZUMI OKUTANI:  -- date on the best practices forum for encouraging environment for IPv6 adoption.  As I've been updating to the MAG members, the focus this year is on the economic element.

 I think we've made quite a good progress so far in fixing the goals and scope of our group as well as having the draft structure of the output document as well as the general time lines.

 I'd like to emphasize the importance of outreach for the best practices forum in two perspectives.  One is to make sure that we get relevant input from a wide range of stakeholders.  And the second is that once the output document is ready, then again we're able to reach out to the target readers of the document.

 And I think one of the great things about having the best practices forum in IGF is that you are able to reach out to the people who you don't usually have the reach on a particular issue.  So in the context of IPv6, we have good reach to the technical communities.  But for this year's focus, we would like to reach out to the people who make business decisions or be able to collect the business cases.  For example, from it companies such as Apple, Google, or companies that have deployed IPv6 on access lines.  But not from the technical people, the people who make the business decision, what is the economic incentive behind IPv6?

 And I would like to ask for support from MAG colleagues on reaching out and helping collect case studies as well as the analysis on how certain economies are more successful in IPv6 adoption than the others.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Izumi.  I think that's a really important point.  And I would like to make sure that people did hear that in that particular -- the IPv6 best practice forum, they are really looking as a very significant portion of their next phase to engage with the business community specifically.  The technical work is mostly done.  They are really can looking for case studies.  So I really would encourage MAG members to use your own contacts and see if you can help support that work.  Advancing IPv6 will support all of us very well in advancing the Internet.

 Next in the queue I have IGFSA, which is Markus Kummer. 

 Markus, you have the floor.

 >>MARKUS KUMMER:  Yes, thank you.  And building on what you said, I think I would also emphasize the importance of outreach.  We had three calls so far, and yesterday a call for contributions was posted on the IGF Web site.  The idea so far is that the experts involved agreed this needs to be seen as a multiyear project as the issue is so broad and also that we should not try and reinvent the wheel and duplicate with what is already done in other organizations but focus on the core competency and the core strengths of the IGF; that is, bring people together from different organizations and focus on coordination, cooperation.

 And we have a dedicated listserv with close to 80 people on it participating with a good range of experts who are not regularly involved in MAG who conduct open consultations.  With this, I also would call on MAG members and other interested people here in the room to subscribe to the list and to engage in the discussions as we go forward.

 And, lastly, maybe a horizontal issue, the question whether we should have a synchronized approach as regards to various deadlines or we should let the individual best practice forums go ahead within their own rhythm, we thought we would need at least three to four weeks now for the contributions and have thought of setting a deadline of mid August.  But we are obviously open here to listen as how others feel it.

 I think most important perhaps is that we all agree then on a final deadline when we all issue our report of final comments going ahead for the Guadalajara meeting.  That should be well in advance, at least one month ahead of the annual meeting itself.

 Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Markus.  I know Jac and Sala have put their hands up to report out on their best practice forums.

 Let's start with Sala over here.  We need to wait until your mic is lit.

 >>SALANIETA TAMANIKAIWAIMARO:  Thank you.  Thank you, Madam Chair.  This is Sala for the record.  I bring greetings on behalf of the other co-chair, Douglas Onyango, and the BPF to the MAG and also to the broader community. 

 And one of the things we wanted to do was to go back to -- as a BPF, one of the things we wanted to do see -- was to do was to go back to the original mandate of the BPF in terms of outlining our activities to the mandate.

 And noting that the report from ECOSOC working group called for an enhancement, to enhance the impact of the IGF on global Internet governance and policy.  Further noting also that the BPF exists to enrich the global policy debate -- or global Internet governance.  We took an approach of examining where we've been as a BPF. 

 And last year -- behind me is Wim, who is our expert consultant who's working closely with the BPF where the BPF took a general approach to producing a document. 

 But, also, simultaneously one of the things that's been happening globally on 3rd Feb 2015, there was a council working group by the ITU that had consultations on discussing the establishment of IXPs to enhance connectivity, improve quality, and increase stability and resilience. 

 As a result of that, there were resolutions reached where the -- where they talked about a cross-collaborative -- there's a council working group on international Internet-related public policy issues.  For those who are interested, that's pertaining to Resolution 1344 and the consultations were opened from 18 February and it's still running and will be closing at 11 September 2016. 

 So given that as a BPF, we have the opportunity also to feed into global forums, it might be useful -- I've noticed that there are many members, many organizations from the broader community that have made submissions.  It's already up on the Web site.  So it would be interesting to see how we could sort of synergize some of the pertinent issues.

 And following calls that the BPF already has had, we're moving into defining a specific scoping statement -- a specific scope for this years' output.  And we'll be updating the MAG and the community through the mailing list.  Thank you, Madam Chair.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Sala. 

 Jac, you didn't get in the queue electronically, but I would like to pull you in now while we stay with the best practice forums.  I'm not sure what your name plate says.  CG?, please, if you could make that mic...

 >>JAC sm KEE:  Thanks, Lynn. 

 So this is Jac reporting on behalf of the best practice forum on gender which I co-coordinate with Renata. 

 We have had three meetings so far.  It's been really good.  Lots of engagement.  We have had new as well as existing members from the last BP participating. 

 So one of the first few meetings is really about defining the scope.  One of the things that came up was that it felt that it was a really good idea to have a best practice forum on gender as a broad thematic area in which different dimensions then can be focused on in subsequent IGF -- well, in subsequent years to ensure the sustainability and that it goes sort of both broad as well as deep.

 For this year, two things were agreed in terms of the scope.  One was to ensure that the best practice forum -- last year's best practice forum on countering online abuse and gender-based violence, that we would keep the outcome document as a sort of living document and some conversation about how do we do this to update on new initiatives that has come up as well as to look at opportunities to both -- let me see now -- to look at opportunities to both extend the dissemination and the use of that document.  And, secondly, to focus on gender and access as the thematic issue this year as it linked very strongly also to SDGs.

 So there are two sort of activities that have been identified.  One is a mapping initiative.  So we are mapping existing research and initiatives on gender and access.  This is both to basically determine whether there are any lessons to be gathered from the existing work as well as to identify gaps in work and research that the BP can work towards.

 And, secondly, is to -- the second activity is to have a kind of Webinar as a way to engage greater participation in outreach as well as to also inform people about the work of the BP. 

 So the first Webinar, in fact, is scheduled for this week and the Webinars are also sort of linked to national and regional IGFs, where possible, where there is discussions around gender and access.

 And that's a way to also make sure that there are kind of linkages between all of the different activities.  So we really do welcome and encourage participation, especially around the mapping initiatives.  It's really very simple.  It's an Excel sheet that's up right now.

 So if you are aware or would like to make sure that work that's happening at different levels around gender access is included as part of this conversation, we really do encourage it.  Thanks.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Jac.

 So we've just heard report-outs from some of the coordinators of the five best practice forums we have, which rely very much on work of the community.  It's also a critical part of extending the IGF's impact and clearly was part of the recommendations of the CSTD working group on improvements to the IGF, which is looking for more concrete outputs.

 So the work is extremely important.  It really depends on the community.  We appreciate all the support and all the time that's put into it.  As I said, all the information on those BPFs is on the IGF Web site, including all the modalities for participation.  But I want to thank everyone for all the time and effort they put in.  That work has really come a very long way over the last few years, and it really is critically important to the success of the Internet and certainly very helpful to the IGF itself as well.

 With that, I would like to move to the next in the queue, which is Constance Bommelaer from ISOC who will be speaking on the major intersessional project we have, Phase II, "Connecting and Enabling the Next Billion."  Constance, you have the floor.

 >>CONSTANCE BOMMELAER:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Can you hear me?  Thank you very much.

 So, first of all, I would like to start by thanking all the MAG volunteers and colleagues outside of the MAG committee who have stepped up and contributed to developing the framework document that I will be presenting today.

 As Lynn mentioned, the best practices but also the policy options for connecting and enabling the next billion have been developed following the CSTD working group on IGF recommendations that were endorsed by ECOSOC, inviting the IGF to contribute to the global Internet governance dialogue by producing more tangible outputs.

 The work this year with regards to policy options for connecting the next billion has also been developed bearing in mind the outcome of the 2015 Sustainable Development Summit where we have a very clear goal, 9C, calling for universal and affordable access for all by 2020.

 So you will remember that following the last MAG meeting and open consultations, we developed a draft framework document to guide our work going forward.  We received many, many contributions, suggestions on how to tailor the exercise this year, many specifically coming from the NRI, the national and regional initiatives. 

 I would like to thank Marilyn and Anja who have really helped collect and solicit these contributions.

 Mainly what came out of the suggestions was a call to take the policy options that we have identified last year -- and I will remind them very quickly:  Deploying infrastructure, increasing usability, enabling users, and entering affordability -- one step further and looking at the regional, national level what are the specificities in terms of market structure, level of capacity-building and so on and so forth.  That needs to be taken into account as policymakers, the industry, civil society work together towards fine-tuning these policy options.

 The second wish that came out of these contributions and suggestions was to try to connect in a more explicit way how ICTs support the different sustainable development goals.

 There have been some suggestions to look at the full list, the 17 sustainable development goals.  I think with -- this set a special emphasis on how the Internet and ICTs can eliminate poverty, contribute to health and well-being, education, and empowering women are clearly the four sustainable development goals that were suggested the more often.

 In terms of next step, now that we have this framework document that has integrated the contributions and suggestions from the community, we will be reiterating what we have done last year calling for open contributions, written contributions.  The tentative date is end of July, but the reality is that last year we accepted contributions throughout the year bearing in mind that some national, regional IGFs may take place later in the year.

 Through an iterative process, we will develop a first draft and then a second draft that will systematically be open for comments through an online platform where anybody can make some suggestions in an open, transparent, and bottom-up fashion. 

 What we will also do is invite any MAG colleagues but also beyond the MAG, experts who would like to contribute to the drafting of these policy options for connecting and enabling -- this is a word we have added in comparison to last year -- the next billion.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Constance. 

 Again, that was a very significant piece of work last year and was in direct response to some of the requests from various quarters for improvements to the outputs of the IGF. 

 Next in the queue is Renata.

 >>RENATA AQUINO RIBEIRO:  Hi.  I just wanted to -- Renata Aquino Ribeiro from Brazil, from the BPF on gender and access with Jac.

 I just wanted to add also upcoming is the item about NRIs, that we are having the Webinar today with IGF Brazil, but also we wanted to present the BPF's work, as well, in the main session, and in the main sessions list I did not see the BFP main session listed, so I was wondering what happened with that idea.

 This could be also addressed tomorrow during the main session discussion, but I just wanted to bring it since we were talking about the BPFs as well.  Thank you.

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  It was excluded in error and then I did send another one out with it in the PDF.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  The next item is updates from the national and regional IGF initiatives.  Again, those initiatives are obviously very central to the advancement of the Internet for the well-being of everyone in the world -- it's not just about the Internet -- and we're very happy that there are 62 such initiatives, at last count, and I think it's also critically important in terms of enabling a lot of activities at the very local level.

 So I'm not quite sure how we're prepared to speak about this.

 I see a number of people have come in. 

 Marilyn Cade, you can have the floor, and then I have Patrik, European Commission, and Council of Europe, and the list is growing, so I'll just keep the list going.

 Marilyn, you have the floor.

 >>MARILYN CADE:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Marilyn Cade speaking.  Can I just clarify that what I'm doing now is an update on the NRIs or are you looking for comments from the floor about the NRIs?  

 I'm prepared to do the update, with Anja help, or we can just take open comments if you prefer.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  No.  I think an update would be very useful.  I know a lot of people are very familiar with the NRIs but perhaps not their scope and reach, so I think a brief update at the top of the discussion would be useful.

 >>MARILYN CADE:  Thank you.

 Marilyn Cade speaking.

 I'm presenting the summary update on behalf of myself and Anja, and I want -- also want to acknowledge that in the room, we also have Yusif and Sala, who have also volunteered to work with us on enhancing the engagement of the NRIs. 

 So this is going to be just a very quick overview of the work that has gone on since the IGF in 2015.  I am going to then post the document to the MAG list, but Anja and I need to insert a map in it so I need to, first of all, get that map inserted.

 So let me, first of all, start out by just giving a few statistics that are important to understand.

 NRIs did not exist as a concept directly called for in the Tunis Agenda.  There was reference to working at a national and local level, and the NRIs began to grow up after the Internet Governance Forum itself planning began.

 In 2011, for instance, we had 12 regional or subregional IGFs, 23 national IGFs, and two youth IGFs.

 In 2016, we have 14 identified as regional or subregional IGFs, we have one that has not met for several years, and we will be talking with them to see if they intend to stay active, but we have three new subregionals in formation:  Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and North Africa IGF.

 That means that -- and I want to congratulate the African region.  That means that we now will have subregional IGFs across all of Africa, as well as national IGFs and of course the continent-wide IGF, the African IGF.

 We have 40 nationals that are in existence right now and we have two to three new that are in formation.

 When I use the term "in formation," that is "in," space, "formation," meaning they are just beginning to plan or have yet to fully put forward their plan for the IGF that they intend to hold.

 We have five youth-affiliated IGFs.  They're all quite unique.  I won't go into a detailed discussion.

 During the IGF 2015, at the substantive session, the NRIs themselves made a number of recommendations.

 One was to double the number of IGFs by 2017 to add in a dedicated focal point.  I'd like to comment and express appreciation to DESA and to the IGF secretariat and to welcome Anja in returning now as the dedicated focal point.

 We also agreed to create a self-developed and peer-reviewed toolkit.  We agreed to increase the networking horizontally across the NRIs, to host a collaborative booth at the IGF, to propose a main session at the IGF, and to establish a way to increase the way that the national and regional coordinators can find each other when they go to other events.

 We will have an NRI informal dialogue tomorrow during the lunch period.  The details for that will follow.  It is primarily for the NRI coordinators to continue work on the main session and their IGF engagement.  It is of course an open meeting and open to observers.

 There will be a separate NRI information discussion that I wish to just mention that Yusif, Sala, Anja, and I will be able to organize with any of the new initiatives who are working toward a new event.

 Now I'd just like to comment about we have held bimonthly calls and we now hold the same call, topic-wise, in the same week but in two different time zones so that we're not so unfriendly to any part of the world.

 Out of that, we have taken a survey of the way that the NRIs would like to conduct the proposed main session.  I've posted that main session and I won't go into the details here, but just to note that it is published and we do have the support of the NRI coordinators.  We will, of course, be looking for MAG feedback and then we will continue the planning with the NRI coordinators for their main session.

 Out of the discussion and the survey, the NRI coordinators have also expressed interest in a separate sort of admin/management-type sharing session that could include the IGF secretariat and the MAG chair and suggest that that perhaps could be held at either -- on either day zero or, if not enough are there, it could even be held over the lunch period.  It would be an informal working session on their part.

 Finally, work is underway on finalizing the -- we do have a request for a booth.  Work is underway on finalizing how it's going to be staffed.  It will be shared with the youth IGFs.  And while there are some initiatives who will have their own booth, there are a significant number who are interested in a shared booth.

 The -- we intend to continue the ongoing bimonthly calls, and we hope to have a -- once the MAG accepts or provides comments on the main session proposal, then we will undertake to finalize the way that that main session will happen.

 Thank you, Chair.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  I think that was a very useful report and thank you to everybody who contributed to it as well.

 So Patrick, you have the floor.

 >>PATRICK HO: Thank you, Madam Chairman.  Let me introduce myself.  I'm Patrick Ho.  I'm a new MAG member.  I'm from the China Energy Fund Committee operated out of Hong Kong, China, and I would like to put in a plea for the -- for developing countries and the national and regional forums for the developing countries.

 And Madam Chairperson, when member states in the Tunis Agenda requested the United Nations secretary-general to convene the IGF, they also called for efforts to strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in Internet governance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries.

 They further requested this forum to advise all stakeholders in proposing ways and means to accelerate the availability and affordability of Internet in the developing world.

 At the same time, the Tunis Agenda also called on us to contribute to capacity building for Internet governance in developing countries, drawing fully on local resources of knowledge and expertise.

 In this spirit, Madam Chairperson, I want to highlight the need for us to do more to strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in global IGFs convened by the United Nations secretary-general through national and regional IGFs, particularly those from developing countries.

 Indeed, this request was reiterated last December by the United Nations General Assembly high-level meeting on WSIS+10 review during which member states recognized that there is a need to promote greater participation and engagement in an Internet governance discussion, including relevant stakeholders from developing countries.

 Member states called for strengthened, stable, transparent, and voluntary funding mechanisms to this end.  The China Energy Fund Committee is an ECOSOC accredited development think-tank and it is our philosophy to promote sustainable development for all, especially the disadvantaged groups, through sound public policy.  We also strongly believe that strengthening national and regional IGFs is a cost-effective way of capacity building, and we pledge to work closely with national and regional IGFs in eastern Asia, southeastern Asia, and the Asia-Pacific area because that's the area where the greatest growth of Internet usage will materialize in the very near future and that's the area where the efforts to achieve the sustainable development goals will be most apparent, especially in attaining sustainment development goal number one, eradicating poverty.  And we are ready to work with partners to explore further options and initiatives for supporting national and regional IGFs.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Patrick.  Next in the queue is the European Commission.  Cristina. 

 And while we're getting the mic lit there, I'll just remind everybody that, in fact, we do have French interpretation here as well if people would prefer to speak or listen in French.  Thank you. 

 Cristina, you have the floor.

 >>CRISTINA MONTI:  Thank you, Chair.  Is this working?  Yes.  Thank you, Chair.  And good morning, everyone.  My name is Cristina Monti, from the European Commission.

 I would like to take this opportunity to briefly report on the recent European dialogue on Internet governance, EuroDIG, which took place in Brussels on the 9th and 10th of June under the theme "Embracing the Digital Revolution."

 This was the ninth edition of EuroDIG and it was hosted by EuroDIG -- I'm sorry, by EURid, the .EU registry, in cooperation with the European Commission, and with the involvement of all EuroDIG partners.

 Approximately 700 representatives from government, business, technical community, civil society, and academia gathered in Brussels to address Internet governance and policy issues, including Internet privacy, security, and access.

 During the event, a number of keynote speeches were given by high-level speakers like the commissioner, the European Commissioner Oettinger, who covered digital single market aspect data flows and data protection.

 Also, the Commission Vice President Ansip intervened and he talked about the European Union vision on -- of Internet governance on the basis of a thriving digital economy and the development of the digital single market strategy.

 He also addressed current efforts from the European Commission for removing geo blocking.

 We also had high-level participation from other partners like the Council of Europe.  The Secretary-General Jagland was there and he spoke about protection and promotion of fundamental values and rights in the digital world.

 We had the foreign minister of Estonia who spoke about human rights and the rule of law on the Internet and cybersecurity, including the important balance between privacy and security.

 This is just to give you a feeling and a sense of the kind of issues that were very topical in this year's EuroDIG meeting.

 We also had other high-level participants, including the ICANN CEO, and we were lucky enough that the meeting coincided with the announcement by NTIA that the IANA stewardship transition proposal meets the required criteria, so that was a good coincidence.

 And we were also very pleased to see you, the MAG chair, also participating actively in the EuroDIG and the -- and Chengetai from the IGF secretariat.

 And in general, there is still a lot of potential that could be used from EuroDIG and create better synergies and linkages with the IGF, so your presence there I think was very useful.

 I would also like to mention that this edition introduced a nice innovation, which was the Twitter wall.  I know that some MAG members were discussing about the possibility of using this also for IGF.

 I think it was really nice and it provided an interactive element which was appreciated by participants.

 And so if this is something that the MAG members are considering for the IGF, maybe it would -- it could be useful to also get in touch with the people in EuroDIG who took care of this particular aspect.

 Finally, just to mention that this edition was important to raise the level of awareness about Internet governance issues in Brussels in what we call the Brussels bubble, which sometimes is very focused on European Union activities, and so this is something positive.

 When -- now, concrete messages are going to be drafted summarizing the discussions that were held in Brussels and these messages will be transmitted to the IGF.

 And in terms of next steps, EuroDIG key partners and supporters are reflecting on how to take full advantage of this multistakeholder bottom-up platform at the pan-European level and to further use the full potentiality of this platform.

 One particular aspect that I would like to highlight is that EuroDIG could be very useful to also debate emerging issues like Internet of Things, blockchain technologies, challenges of the sharing economy, and I think that this is something that also the IGF could consider, and this in addition and beyond the specific focus on ICT as an enabler for sustainable development goals.  In Brussels, the discussion was really a lot about digital economy and the transformation that it is bringing to our societies and our economies.  Thank you very much.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Cristina.  It really was a very good event and the discussions were very high-level and I think in part because there was such a good diversity of participants.  Certainly government, civil society, technical.  So it really was a very good event.

 Next in the queue we have Council of Europe.  Lee?

 >>LEE HIBBARD:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  This is just -- thank you, Madam Chair.  This is just to echo -- as one of the partners of the EuroDIG since the beginning, this is just to echo what Cristina has said, that it was a very good event, and to say that it also brought together -- I think we -- in Europe, there's over 25 or maybe 28 national and regional initiatives, which is probably the -- more initiatives in one continent than any other continent, and there was a lot of pre-events and side events to mention.

 And we had a -- we had a special event which actually Anja and I chaired, moderated, on national and regional initiatives, which was very, very good.

 I think it's driven also by partners.  I mean, there's a cloud of partners around the EuroDIG as well.  This includes the commission, RIPE NCC, Council of Europe, and several others, and it's very important that they support this and to drive it forward.  Outreach is also done by them.  I think that's a good best practice.

 There were 39 events organized over the two days or the two and a half days based upon 132 proposals for different workshops.  That's quite a lot.  And so that's really the basis on which we started at EuroDIG this year.

 Looking forward, EuroDIG will take place in Estonia in 2017 for its 10th anniversary.  The date has not been set.  And there will be -- just drawing back to now, we have messages from Brussels which will be conveyed to the IGF 2016 which are being prepared at the moment.  Thank you, Madam Chair.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Lee.

 Next in the queue is Egypt.  Christine, you have the floor.

 >>CHRISTINE ARIDA:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Is it working?  Yeah. 

 Okay.  I would like to thank all colleagues that have advanced the intersessional work and acknowledge the big effort that they've been doing, whether the best practice forums or the policy options for connecting and enabling the next billion.

 And I think it's -- those are very important efforts that enhance the impact of the IGF, and there was so much effort put into engaging stakeholders in that intersessional work as we moved towards the yearly meeting, especially going organically through maybe national and regional initiatives.  But I think what we need also to think about -- and maybe this could be done while we are work intersessionally to design what we are going to do for those initiatives -- is that we also focus on how can we market those outputs when they actually come out of the yearly meeting, because I think this is something that we're missing.  Although there's so much effort being done, I believe the impact organically is not as big as it should have been, and for that, I think we should maybe align with national and regional initiatives to go to them with the output, possibly in their -- in their preparatory phase, after the yearly meeting or even in their yearly event that follows the IGF. 

 But we can maybe also target the diplomatic circles in Geneva and New York.  And I think we should go with those outputs to the regional and national events or international events that go across the region like ICANN, ITU events, and so forth.  Main (indiscernible) maybe.  I think it's very important that we do this step because unless we go through that, the impact will remain restrained within the IGF community.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Christine.  I think those are very good points.  I think there's a lot of different requests that come through for what we can do to make the impact much more significant on the grounds.  So those are some good comments.

 Next in the queue, I have Juuso. 

 Juuso, you have the floor.

 >>JUUSO MOISANDER:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Just to add to the previous speakers that as chair of one of the Nordic IGFs, the Finnish Internet Forum, I used the convening power of the EuroDIG to organize a discussion among the Nordic IGF initiatives on improving our coordination and cooperation towards a possible Nordic IGF in the future.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Juuso.  Just been reminded by my Finnish learning colleague here that it's Juuso.  The J is silent.  So thank you. 

 I attended that meeting and thought it was very useful.

 I have Zeina in the queue and then Jivan.  Zeina, you have the floor.

 >> ZEINA BOU HARB:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  I just want to give a brief status of the Arab region IGFS.  I just would like to -- actually to announce that the ESCWA and the League of Arab States ordered the proposed new initiative which is the AIGF 2020.  And the technical cooperation working group has been established just for the enhancement and improvement of the Arab IGF.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  That's very interesting. 

 Jivan, you have the floor.

 >>JIVAN GJORGJINSKI:  Just to repeat something that we have been discussing before, and that is that there should be a more coherent effort to connect all of these initiatives in some form.  Nothing structured -- nothing too structured but at the same time, just the fact that most of them are going over common issues.  And the thing is, perhaps in one region, it's going to be this year but in another region, those kind of issues will come up at another period.  So it's a good way to reconsider what has been already considered.

 And a good way is perhaps questions and answers.  So that perhaps at the end of an IGF, the issues, the questions that pop up should be structured in some way.  At least a part of the report.  These are the questions that were unresolved, such as the issue that was raised by Izumi earlier about the fact that the business community can contribute a lot to IPv6 discussions.

 So those kinds of discussions formulated at the end of IGF to be considered next year by national, regional IGFs and then those -- each of them to contribute to next year's IGF with some thoughts on that and perhaps a formal discussion around them comparing experiences. 

 So I think that that kind of question-answer cycle can provide some kind of a loose framework to discuss common issues and to put them in a given context and then to provide a way to discuss them across regions.  Thanks.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  I think those are some very interesting comments as well.

 I have Marilyn in the floor as the last speaker for this particular topic here and then we will move --

 >>MARILYN CADE:  Thank you, Chair.  Marilyn Cade speaking as the substantive coordinator. 

 I just want to respond to some of the comments that have been made because I think perhaps it would be useful for MAG members who are not themselves directly engaged in the NRIs to have an opportunity to read the reports that we post from all of our calls.

 Some of the issues that have been raised are very much on the minds of the NRI coordinators, and they are discussing how to better reflect into the IGF and how to reflect from the IGF into the NRIs.

 We chose that term after much debate in multiple substantive meetings of NRIs over several years addressing the fact that there is no hierarchy but there's a very strong interest and a very strong engagement in the -- between the NRIs and the IGF itself.


 So I just want to comment that, that work is underway.  I flashed past the idea that we are trying to increase the horizontal networking.  We called for the creation of observatory where the NRIs could post concepts and calls for action that they themselves have developed, perhaps share their version of best practices about tools and resources.  We've also now been -- very thankfully we see that Anja has been appointed, and I just want to point out that the development of the peer-reviewed toolkit will now begin to take place.

 So perhaps one of the things that we'll be able to see by the NRIs having their first main session at the IGF is how some of the comments of the MAG members are also being reflected in the work of the NRIs.  Thank you, Chair.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  And I think "reflect" is a good word.

 I also want to thank, before you move into the DCs, all those that are involved in the national and regional IGF initiatives because it's a tremendous amount of work.  They are very important to the work we are all doing here.  I also know they are one of the first go-to places when the IGF is actually looking for participation, support, or ideas. 

 So -- and I think I want to acknowledge all the work that they're doing.  Often that's in a volunteer mode.  But it is critically important certainly to the richness of the IGF but also to impact at a local level.

 With that, we'll move to the agenda item on dynamic coalitions.  I assume it's some combination of Markus and Avri that are going to speak.

 Avri, you have the floor.

 >>AVRI DORIA:  Thank you.  Avri Doria speaking, a MAG member, assuming I can be heard.

 So I actually don't have that much to report.  And I don't know how many of the dynamic coalitions we actually have with us that may want to say something about it.

 There are 16 of the dynamic coalitions now, most of which have sort of this bottom-up construction that work in their own way. 

 But the dynamic coalition coordinating group has actually been working.  It meets every three to four weeks.  The schedule is somewhat ad hoc in terms of finding a good time when everybody around the world can actually meet.  And have put together a request for a slot on the main program, which I'm sure we'll be talking about in a different slot; so I'm not going to talk about that.

 But one of the things we have seen in the dynamic coalition coordination group is really a coming together, a working together, a finding a way to look for the issues that are common to them all.  So that's been very heartening because this is a group that really does work through the full year and is not really timed to the annual meeting but it does target the annual meeting for reports.  So I think that that's pretty much what's going on. 

 One of the things I do want to mention is that there's very strong support there for things like Twitter walls and tweet walls.  It's something that they have incorporated in their program and such.

 So I don't know -- oh, yes.  The other thing I did want to mention is they have decided together that they also want to apply for one of the booth spaces so that all the dynamic coalitions would be able to take turns and such being there and working.  So very much trying to now integrate themselves into the program of the meeting.

 I don't know if Markus has anything he would like to add.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Avri.  I think that's really good news on the booth and certainly on the main session as well.

 I have number 224 in the queue.  Oh, that's Mr. Chip Sharp.  Is it not?

 >> SHARADA SRINIVASAN:  Am I audible?  No.

 >> Yes.

 >> SHARADA SRINIVASAN:  Oh, okay.  Hello?  My name is Sharada.  I'm a research fellow at University of Pennsylvania, Center for Technology, Innovation, and Competition.  And this is my first time at a MAG consultation process.

 I'm here to talk about the dynamic coalition for innovative approaches to connecting the unconnected.  We are a very new dynamic coalition.  We were convened earlier this year.  The coordinators are Christopher Yoo, Michael Kende, Helani Galpaya, and Rajan Mathews. 

 I just wanted to report out on initial work that we're undertaking and, honestly, make a call out to members of the MAG as well as members of the community that are here so that they can help us or, if they're interested, participate more in the work that they're doing.

 We are currently undertaking a literature review to identify potential case studies to try and understand innovative ways of connecting unconnected communities.  So this goes beyond just the policy approaches that have been mentioned already.  They're looking at on-the-ground solutions that are being implemented.  And we are very interested in hearing about case studies both by businesses as well as, like, innovative things such as community networks that are happening around the world.

 They're also looking at reviewing submissions that have been at the IGF already and seeing if there are potential case studies that we can document.  We hope to have some preliminary case studies that we can present at this year's IGF, but we are looking to get more and more data and analyze it to be able to have more information on these approaches, what works, and what doesn't. 

 So that's what we're doing.  If any of the people here are either working on similar issues or are interested in being part of the dynamic coalition, we do have a listserv that's available on the Internet Governance Forum Web site.  Do join us and do have a conversation with me.  I'd love to talk to you.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.

 Next in the queue is 166, which I'm assuming is Chip Sharp. Chip, you have the floor.

 >>CHIP SHARP:  Thank you.  Appreciate it.  I just had to wait for my light to turn red.

 Just a quick question.  Since it related to dynamic coalitions, since it wasn't mentioned -- or maybe I missed it.  Just want to check, so there will not be any idea rating sheets or efforts to endorse dynamic coalition output at this upcoming IGF?  That was a discussion last year.  Since I didn't hear anything about it, I assume that will not be a topic this year.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, chip, for the question.  I will see if Avri or Markus -- Avri would like to respond. 

 Avri, you have the floor.

 >>AVRI DORIA:  Thank you.  Part of the discussion will happen more when we are talking about the program.  We are discussing using a form of the rating sheets, and we do expect there to be some output from the session that we hold. 

 Haven't gotten to the point of actually talking whether we are looking for a specific endorsement of specific DC's input.  That's an ongoing conversation still within the DC coordinating group. 

 But certainly there is a conversation about how we're going to use the idea rating sheet idea differently this time, use it earlier, use it such.  But that conversation is still ongoing.  But they are part of the program. 

 And I guess when we talk about the program, the main session issue, will talk about it more there.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Avri. 

 Chip, does that answer your quite-specific question?  I think Chip is indicating yes for now.

 That brings me to the end of the queue, although I'll do one quick double-check to see if there is anybody online.

 >>REMOTE INVERVENTION:  Yes, if you allow, Thomas Schneider would like to intervene.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Yes. 

 Thomas, you have the floor.

 >>REMOTE INVERVENTION:  It seems Thomas is not connected to audio.  Maybe we can come to this later.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Would he like to wait, or is he typing his comment in?

 >>REMOTE INVERVENTION:  He's not typing anything, but I'm going to ask him maybe to send the comment and then I can read it.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Okay.

 Somewhat astonishingly, that actually brings us to the end of the mornings' agenda.  I say "astonishingly" because we are actually 15 minutes early.  Normally we are quite pressed for time on those discussions.  So I can certainly give everybody the gift of 15 minutes of time. 

 But before doing that, I'll just cover quickly the agenda for this afternoon and see if there are any final remarks that anybody would like to make.

 So we will reconvene at 3:00.  And for an hour and a half or so we have an open discussion on the retreat on advancing the ten-year mandate of the IGF.  Wai-Min Kwok from UN DESA is actually going to just say a few words of introduction.  And then we are really looking for quite an open, and I'm sure, a fairly robust discussion as well.

 After that, we'll move to briefings from other related or relevant initiatives or organizations.  As I said, there were five or so that had come in with specific requests to give some brief updates on their activities and specifically where they think there might be some collaboration opportunities with the IGF.  And certainly is open for any other updates from the floor in a similar vein as well.

 And then that leaves 45 minutes at the end of the day to either continue with a retreat discussion, if that is of most interest, or if there are other topics that individuals would like the opportunity to bring up.  Then we will use that slot for that.

 At some point during the afternoon, I will try and decide whether there are other topics that people would like to use that slot for or do we continue on with either one of the other two agenda items, either the retreat or briefings from other organizations.  But we'll take that call partway through the afternoon.

 Just trying to check a note here.

 Yes.  So, first, I'd like to thank all the U.N. staff for helping us sort out the mic system here.  I think it got better after we sort of calmed down.  And probably I was actually not using individual's first names but, in fact, the names on your placards.  That signals which mic to actually light up.  So I want to thank them for all their support and staff there.

 Obviously want to support the interpreters and the scribes.  We do have scribing.  Those transcripts are incredibly useful.  I actually rely on them a lot myself.  And certainly the secretariat, too, for all of their support and activities here.

 And now I'm looking to see if Thomas -- if that has given Thomas time to put his comment in or not.

 >>REMOTE INVERVENTION:  Yes, if you allow, I will read his comment.  Just a second. 

 Hi, this is Thomas Schneider from Switzerland.  I just wanted to inform you about a national IGF that has probably a unique feature.  At the Swiss IGF that was held for the second time this year in May, we had a one-day meeting with substantive three plenaries and two workshops. 

 What is probably unique at the Swiss IGF is the fact that we decided in the multistakeholder steering group that we will not allow panels.  We only have two five-minute entry talks and then no panels.  We had an audience of around 100 people talking to each other, people from all stakeholder groups including members of parliament. 

 And it was an amazing experience that everybody loved because there was a completely different dynamic and extremely rich in substance because with this format, many newcomers to the IGF were able to participate and share their expertise.

 This is in contrast to many sessions elsewhere where you have the same panelists talking almost all the time.  This is an inspiration for how making sessions more -- this will be the end of my comment.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you.  Does sound like a very interesting experience.

 I have Liesyl Franz in the queue. 

 Liesyl, you have the floor.

 >>LIESYL FRANZ:  Thank you, Chair.  And good morning, everybody -- or afternoon, I suppose.  And I -- at the risk of taking away two minutes of your 15 minutes to give everything back, I just didn't know if you wanted me to provide just a quick overview of the main session proposals that came in.  I noticed it was on the agenda, and maybe I skipped my moment at the time.  I don't know if you wanted me to provide that quick read-out.

 Okay.  Just thank you to everybody who provided proposals for the main sessions.  And apologies to Ginger and Jac for not capturing their proposal in the first go-round.  Thank you, Chengetai, for resending the proposal compilation.

 There were nine main session proposals that came in.  I'll read them briefly for the benefit of the transcriptions and open consultation, knowing that we will probably have more of a discussion about them later in the week.

 The first is towards an interoperable global Internet network, solving current problems on cyber jurisdiction. 

 The second is connecting the next billion, phase 2, as we heard from Constance earlier. 

 The third is sustainable development, Internet and inclusive growth.

 Next is trade agreements and the Internet. 

 Next is the proposal for the dynamic coalitions main session.

 Oops.  Sorry.  There we go.

 Then shaping the future of Internet governance, which was proposal -- workshop proposal 179.

 Next is assessing the role of Internet governance in the SDGs.

 Next is the national and regional IGF initiatives main session. 

 And then the ninth one, economic, social, and cultural rights, what are the implications for the Internet and sustainable development.

 The compilation includes the proposals that people sent in with more information, if that's of -- so be sure to take a look at that.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Good.  Thank you, Liesyl.  That was a helpful intervention.

 With that, I think we'll call this session closed.  We'll look to start promptly at 3:00, if we can, though.  We have quite a number of very interesting and somewhat meaty topics, so I thank you all and I will see you back here at 3:00.

 [ Lunch break ]

 [ Gavel ]

 >>CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Ladies and gentlemen, we're about to start in one minute.  Thank you very much.  If we could all take our seats.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Well, thank you, everybody, for coming back here.  I just want to -- a couple of quick comments on the agenda for this afternoon.  We have had two requests for the last slot, which is an open discussion.  One of them was specifically a couple of the community members requested time to discuss some of the topics that are on the Day 2 and Day 3 of this meeting.  In other words, the MAG meeting itself.  And I'm going to -- I think that's only appropriate that if there are topics that are of interest to the community members from the MAG meeting which will kick off tomorrow morning, that we give some floor time to that.  So we will try and maintain the overall timing of the schedule here.

 And then there was also a request for a very brief presentation on some work Miguel and the working group has been doing on new formats, and I think that it would be helpful in terms of just getting people to think about it a little bit, think about it overnight.  We can talk about it a little bit more before we go into the broader workshop discussion tomorrow.

 So we have those two items on that final slot.

 So with that, I will turn the floor over in just a moment to Wai-Min Kwok from UN DESA.  He's going to just introduce the retreat.  I think a lot of information has been shared already.  He's not intending to do a full or comprehensive presentation but a short retreat [sic], and then we would open it up to comments from the floor.

 And in this session, we clearly want to hear from community members.  We also obviously need to hear from the MAG members as well.

 So it will be a slightly different session than what we might normally do in terms of prioritizing speakers in the open consultation day.

 So with that, I'll give the floor to Wai-Min.

 >>WAI-MIN KWOK:  Thank you, Madam Chair.

 Let me just start with what Mr. Wu, under secretary general for DESA, mentioned this morning.

 This retreat is really part of an ongoing process that really is what you know.  IGF has -- there's a past 10 years of IGF history, but looking forward, there's -- this renewal of 10 years is an opportunity for the community as a whole to see how we can advance not just on a more ad hoc or yearly effect but what is the longer-term strategy to guide us through that.

 First is that for -- for DESA, I think we are convening this on behalf of the secretary-general.  One is that it's actually -- other than the Tunis outcome, it's also related very much to the development agenda of UN DESA itself.

 So -- but then again, IGF is a very unique platform.  It is unlike other platforms.  At the U.N., as you know, we have several platforms.  The IGF being that unique, that means we really have to call on the community to give us advice.  The retreat is really a brainstorming session for -- we're actually looking at participants with rich experience, with diverse expertise, some of whom have contributed a lot, some of whom have good knowledge. 

 As you know, Mr. Nitin Desai will be joining us, at least in the beginning of the retreat.  We also have -- other than Lynn herself, we have former chair of MAG, including Markus himself, Janis.  We are also getting Mr. Peter Major, who is the CSTD chair and who is also the chair of the working group on improvement of IGF.  And a lot of you know that the retreat participants in any case, they're all published in the Web site, the IGF Web site.  And along with that is also all the documents there.

 While there are different -- different consideration constraints being the retreat -- the objective, I'd like to take more of a holistic strategy discussion among individuals who have expertise, but how to actually come up with refreshing idea, and also it's not just one idea, it can be different ideas.  It can be polarized ideas, it can be opposing views, but to pull together.  That goes to kind of what initially we talk about as outcome but now we actually -- we correct our text, because "outcome" I think it also leads to different interpretations.  So at the end of the retreat, there will be a set of ideas, a set of suggestions, probably in one document or a single document.  That's actually more -- more of the formatting.  But in any case, that will be going back to the community.  As we have several discussions with some of you, including with Lynn as the chair, it could be a working document, it could be -- it could serve as an ongoing work in progress to guide the work of different work streams, including whether it's in the MAG or in the IGF secretariat itself or the different initiatives coming from IGF.

 One last thing that I want to mention is that the -- there is actually this open process and the inclusive process of IGF is something that we would like to continue to uphold.  So as you know, starting from the agenda, the call for participations -- right? -- and also the call for inputs, at this moment we receive a total of 28 inputs.  They're all on line.  And part of the discussion -- not part, but in the discussion, any documents coming out will also be published on line as soon as they are ready.

 We continue -- we have to continue to listen to all the stakeholders, including yourself, the wider community, on how we can actually improve not just the retreats, the modality, but also the entire IGF process itself.  So thank you, Madam Chair.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Wai-Min. 

 And there are no other comments from Chengetai?

 I don't know that I have anything to add to that specifically, so I think we'll just open the floor for questions, and I want to check and see if we have the online participation sorted out.  No?

 >> (Off microphone.)

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  But are they able to hear us or are they just reading from the transcript?

 >> (Off microphone.)

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Okay.  I do hope we get that sorted out soon.

 So in the queue, I have mic 166.  Okay.  I'm going to remember you as -- you have the floor, Chip.

 >>CHIP SHARP:  Thank you very much, and I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the retreat.

 I guess a couple of questions I'm not -- still not really clear on in terms of the retreat is, it sounds like there's going to be some output from this retreat.  I guess there should be, since there wouldn't be a point of having a retreat if not there's not some output.  But the question -- my question is:  What -- who is that output going to and what are they going to do with it?  I mean, what's going to be made -- what is this going to be made use of?  Thank you.

 >>WAI-MIN KWOK:  What I mentioned just now, the outputs will be a list of ideas and suggestions.  And they could be different documents of the five identified sessions following the agenda.  And this will be put online for consultation with the different stakeholder groups including the MAG itself.  So there is actually no -- first of all, no decisions.  And it will not even be mentioned as recommendations.  But it's a list of ideas and suggestions to see how we can actually put forward for consideration.


 One example is the NRI.  How the whole community including the IGF secretariat should do the support to NRI, so there could be a list of ideas.  As I mentioned, it's brainstorming.  So there could be many ideas.  Some of this could be related to find -- some of it will be related to communication outreach.  So that can be different work stream including the current initiative by the MAG and also the various NRI focal point.  They could actually take that for future action.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you, Wai-Min. 

 We would actually like to hear from people here in terms of what would work.  Obviously there have been smaller discussions and smaller group meetings and people sending in suggestions.  One of the suggestions we looked at was to do something similar to the WSIS+10 output paper from last year's IGF, which had a series of guiding questions as input to the discussion.  The discussion was held.  It was very open, very multistakeholder.  We had four microphone queues around the room.

 And the paper that was submitted afterwards, which is part of the IGF record, basically, said there was a discussion around topic X, a little bit kind of context or background, and then tried to represent -- and I was the one who wrote the bulk of it, but tried to represent there was significant agreement on X with some dissenting opinions on Y; or Y was proposed but there was no clear consensus and a couple of other alternatives were suggested.

 So it was a factual report-out which tried to sort of assess for everybody else in the room what sort of support there was or wasn't for the various points that came up in the meeting. 

 So one suggestion is we do something like that, probably organized around the five main sessions and then we put the document up for public comment, possibly using the same platform, the same tool that, in fact, was used for the Connecting the Next Billion Phase I pilot, which allows for very interactive editing.  In fact, I think that was the same platform that was used for the NETmundial input document or paper. 

 But, again, we are really looking for the conversation today and the next couple of days to help clarify what may help people know of better practices, better processes, better tools.  I think everybody would like to hear them.  And then, of course, we would need to get the support of the participants and the retreat on the day as well.

 So I throw that out there.  We are really looking to hear from -- assuming everybody wants the IGF to be as successful and have as much impact as possible, that this is -- this retreat is the start of a journey which is really looking to start a discussion at quite a high-level brainstorming that we can take out to the community and communities.  What would make that most helpful?  Assuming, again, we all share the objective of looking to advance the IGF and have as much impact as possible from the work we all do. 

 So with that, I'll open the queue.  If people could really please use their mic.   You have your hand up in the back.  But if you could use the technology in front of us as well, that would be helpful.  Please introduce yourself.

 >> RICHARD JORDAN:  Thank you.  Richard Jordan from the Royal Academy of Science International Trust. 

 I think one use of any group of ideas should all go to whoever the new Secretary-General will be.  I think many of them have stressed the desire to reach out to different audiences, to reach out to youth, to engage business and industry.  And I think whoever it is should benefit perhaps from ideas.  And that could be one purpose of whatever is produced, whether they're just ideas or later recommendations.  Thank you.

 >>CHAIR ST. AMOUR:  Thank you. 

 Michael Nelson, you have the floor.

 >>MICHAEL NELSON:  Thank you, Chairman.  Mike Nelson with CloudFlare, a web security company.

 As you work through the issues at the retreat, I hope that a lot of time will be spent on what I consider a pretty serious problem, which is that we are losing some of our stakeholders at the IGF. 

 When we heard the report first thing this morning about where the proposals came from, I think we heard that only about 10% of the proposals came from the private sector.  And if you look at what's been happening over the last five years, we really have seen fewer and fewer people from the private sector who are making some very important decisions about Internet governance.  So I think we have to face up to that.<