PART C: Conclusion and Next Steps
PART C (draft ii)
CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 [To be addressed at IGF 2016 session, and updated thereafter]
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 [To be addressed at IGF 2016 session, and updated thereafter]
I would think it appropriate to include here a more specific item on involvement of private sector, under the larger banner of responsible intermediaries/entities, that was mentioned in the framing section. Otherwise the recommendations oscillate predominantly between policy and technical communities.
Interesting idea and would like to read more, perhaps in the form of a specific best practice. Especially as it presents a tension with the assumed heterogeneity of multistakeholderism. While subject focus is important, it must also be balanced with the benefits of diverse views and experiences that influence outcomes.
I think Adam’s comment is well received. However, I’m not sure that it fits into the text here as it is rather specific. There are some more best practices that could be listed here, such as code audits or FLOSS development. Suffice to mention the importance of responsible intermediaries to put in place processes and mechanisms to facilitate coordination with and among those from all stakeholder groups with the knowledge and skill sets necessary to improve cybersecurity.
add “[sic]” as after some sourcing and re-reading I believe the sentence should read “… issues such as education…”
+1
amended in final text: 5.1.1. Meetings and Events segmented in two parts: ‘at the local level’ and ‘at the regional, international and global level’
Thank you Malcolm; amended text:
IXP business models vary depending on whether an IXP is for-profit or not-for-profit. In general, a for-profit IXP aims to be profitable and distributes this profit as a dividend, or equivalent payment, while not-for-profit IXPs exchange traffic without the intention of distributing profit, but with the intent to invest any surplus in the future development of the IXP.
And an addition to my second comment:
The road to a local IGF: Country profiles, A condensed collection of the experiences fellows made (and are making) setting up a national IGF: http://igf.academy/IGF-Academy-profiles.pdf)
Website content © Internet Governance Forum 2021. All rights reserved.
Source: https://www.intgovforum.org/review/cenb/part-c-conclusion-and-next-steps/
Comments