@Raoul, I personally do not see the added value of starting an IGF Best Practice Forum.
The process would be entirely controlled by MAG and there is litterally zero added value
in using a BPF. I still have to see a concrete exemple of impact produced by the various
BPFs for which the IGF Secretariat even pays consultants...
I think both quality and impact of what this group can produce have quite clearly
demonstrated to be more interesting.
@Sarbani, thank you very much for your availability! My proposal was to consolidate
existing POLICY elements. Therefore I would look at exisiting laws/regulations and at the
work we have already done to map such laws/regulation or to propose improvements.
To give you an idea, I would like to look at policy suggestions regarding i) Definitions
(of CN, CN users, etc); ii) License exemptions: iii) Spectrum policy; iv) Open-access to
telecom infrastructures; v) Use of free software ; vi) Tax Exemptions for CNs; vii)
Capacity building programmes; Etc.
Anyone is welcome to join :)
Will share the initial work soon
All the best
De: dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net [dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net] em nome de
Sarbani Banerjee Belur [sarbanibelur(a)iitb.ac.in]
Enviado: sexta-feira, 29 de março de 2019 1:37
Assunto: Re: [DC3] 2019 Outcome and IGF + RightsCon Sessions
Thanks Luca for initiating this. I can contribute to this activity wholeheartedly. I would
also like to propose a benchmarking of community networks alongside best practices. This
would make the policy document strong.
On 29-03-2019 09:24, Raoul Plommer wrote:
Hi Luca and thanks for keeping tabs on this,
We might also want to consider a best practices forum, but I'm unsure on f we're
there yet. Just my two cents. :)
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, 22.15 Luca Belli,
As the deadline to submit a draft description for our IGF session is
(12 April), I would like to start a conversation on what could be our 2019 outcome and,
therefore, how could we better use our IGF session (and our recently approved RightsCon
session!) to present and discuss such outcome.
Having already elaborated quite substantial research on CNs, I think we could try to build
upon the elements we already have and I would like to propose we sketch a Model Policy for
Over the past 4 years, we have been very successful in demonstrating that CN developers
are serious partners and CNs are feasible options, and we have demonstrated this with very
sound research and engaging an incredibly wide range of actors (including the ITU).
Besides the research demonstrating the feasibility and interest of CNs and instructions on
how to build them, I think it may be time to provide also instructions for policymakers on
how to facilitate CNs.
What do you think?
The main elements of what could be a Model Policy for Community Networks are already
present in the works that we have developed collectively or separately (the Declaration on
Community Connectivity; the netCommons the Open letter to EU policy makers, the
Declaration of the First Latin American Summit of Community Network, etc) and, therefore,
I think this effort would be mainly an effort of consolidation and discussion. And, of
course, we could use the RightsCon session and IGF session to present preliminary versions
and receive feedback from a wider spectrum of individuals/stakeholders, to better
structure our work.
If list members think this idea may be worth pursuing, I could start consolidating the
docs mentioned above (if anyone wants to help, be my guests :)) and then circulate the
draft to start working on it collaboratively.
Looking forward to hearing comments
All the best
Luca Belli, PhD
Professor of Internet Governance and Regulation
+55 21 3799 5763 t @1lucabelli<https://twitter.com/1lucabelli>
Praia de Botafogo, 190 13º andar
Botafogo - Rio de Janeiro, RJ - CEP: 22250-900
DC3 mailing list
DC3 mailing list
Dr. Sarbani Banerjee Belur
Senior Project Research Scientist
Gram Marg: Rural Broadband Project
Department of Electrical Engineering
Mob: +91 9867282979