<BR>
<P>Dear Europeans, dear all</P>
<P>I'm surprised, that more than a week after the WGIG meetings at Geneva, there isn't any comment from our mailing-list on the Report presented and discussed during these meetings.</P>
<P>As far as I'm concerned I wrote a report of the 20 July "open" meeting which can be found on CSDPTT website (<A href="http://www.csdptt.org/">www.csdptt.org</A>). Of course, the report is in french. But it requires from you, fluent english speaking people, only a small part of the effort I'd to make during three hours, in listening to mainly "high Internet level academicians" who were speaking as fast as they use to do with their campus fellows. However, those who are interessted and willing to make an effort, my report is attached to this mail. </P>
<P>Just some remindings of the content and comments upon the "Statement by the UK on behalf of the EU of the EU - Presentation of the WGIG report, 18 July 2005", the only (!) document that was displayed on the room entrance table for preparing the discussion. .</P>
<P>This statemnent says that the EU position on Internet Gouvernance (IG) has been outlined by the EU Council of Ministers and states that "The question of internationalisation of the management of the Internet's core resources, namely the domain name system, IP addresses, and the root server system, are the main issues in this debate". Ascertaining that "the existing IG mechanisms should be founded on a more solid democratic, transparent and multilateral basis", it asks for stronger emphasising public policy interests of all gouvernmemnts, and for clarifying the "respective roles of the international and intergouvernmental organisations in the field of IG". It adds tthat EU encourages cooperation between international and intergouvrernmental organisations and, finally, </P>
<P>. but the following para sets a "bemol" in precising that the new l </P>
<P>t, </P>
<P> </P>