No matter if you might buy inexpensive customized essays or any other documents, you have got to search through this procedure.
- Construct a task for us. Fill out the shape of your thing to do. Write about the willpower, type of function, the span, timeline, in addition to other critical information belonging to your task.
- Buy a journalist. It’s time for putting in a bid. Freelance writers provide you with their price levels. Definitely, the retail price is a very worthwhile specifications when selecting a freelance writer, but take note of a writer’s know-how and rating stance. Also, you can locate information from prospective buyers about writers. You’ll most likely must know the writer’s trend. Verify it by looking for page one within your exercise. This will assist to establish a final choice.
- Clarify information. As you used to be filling up in any form, perhaps you authored traditional information on your procedure. Now, you should give much more information onto a journalist. Use live life chat to connect with him or her. Explain to relating to the sound in the project urgent essays, degree of paragraphs, set up form, for example.
- Pay money for the most important piece. You have to take care of an element of the total amount. Following that, your chosen freelance writer starts to improve your select.
- Management the steps. You can include some raw materials and request to alter a thing contained in the sms at each step. You can still deal with your whole progression well. It avoids from correcting the task right before the timeline.
Get clearly what you want. As your obtain is ready and you are delighted by virtually every expression, we give back the order – and you will have to invest for the last thing.
And Then Finally
We’ll be very glad to offer low-cost essays http://www.okessay.co.uk/essay-help 24/7! Make your order without delay, our freelance writers are willing to do the trick when you absolutely need them. You’ll get big-excellent written documents by the due date. But will not pause, alternatively you probably should start attaining angry just before the deadline is up.
Minutes of the Executive board of ISOC-ECC
Venue: Skype conference
1.Andres Oliva –AO, vice-chair
2.Borka Jerman-Blažič – BJB, chair
3.Rudi Vansnick – RV – treasurer
Absent: Eric Thompson – secretary
0.Review of the actions from the second GA of ISOC-ECC, October 2006
1.Status of the server and services
2.FP7 call on Future Internet
3.European Privacy Institut
4. 1 Elections/mandate of the Executive Committee
4.2 Next GA
5.Incorporation of the rest of the chapters
7.Inviting new Chapters to join ISOC-ECC
8. Possibility for opening poject calls to ECC member Chapters
Actions from the second GA:
– Send concrete proposal for the enlargement of the ISOC-ECC Executive Committee. (Borka),TO BE PROPOSED ON THE NEXT GA
– Message to membership to launch discussion on the main ISOC-ECC activities (Rudi)s, in work (see this document)
– Open Forum at the WEB pages (Andres, Rudi) to discuss the main ISOC-ECC activities ON-GOING , see this document
– Proposal to welcome the new ISOC Reston board members and ask for replacement ofNelson Sanchez (Borka), DONE
– Letter to Mrs. Viviane Reding presenting ISOC-ECC and asking for formal support. (Borka), in preparation
– Clear up the financial support of the Catalonian organisation (Andrés), DONE, funds being transferred.
– Website update(andres), DONE
ISOC.EU registration data update (Rudi and Michiel) DONE
– Reservation of ISOC-ECC.EU (Rudi) DONE
– Activation of these domains pointing to ISOC-ECC website. (Rudi) DONE
– Establishment of ISOC-ECC mirror sites. (ISOC Belgium and ISOC Germany) in work
– Message inviting ISOC-ECC members to send their proposals of actions and plans related to financial expenses (Rudi), in work, see this document
– Establishment of ISOC-ECC’s financial plan (Rudi) in work
– Web site update. DONE
– Concrete proposal regarding ISOC-ECC’s liaison and back up representatives to third bodies (ISOC France and ISOC Belgium-Wallonie) DONE, invitation sent to the member list
– Statement about ISOC-ECC relations with Euralo (Sébastien).In progress
– Concrete proposal: the Internet Governance European Forum project (Sébastien). In progress
– Publish Borka’s presentation on ISOC-ECC website (Rudi), DONE
– Establishment of ISOC-ECC mirror sites. (ISOC Belgium and ISOC Germany)
Michiel Leenaars, ISOC-Netherlands, in work
– ISOC.EU registration (Rudi and Michiel), DONE
Ad.1 The server is running better now, but still happens to be down. The reason could be in the damaged network card that will purchase by AO and passed to the organization that maintained the server. AJB and AO will contact Prof. Artur Serra responsible for the organization i2CAT regarding provision of better service. ISOC De will be asked for a provision of mirror site.
Ad.2 Several contacts set up. ISOC-ECC invited to join the initiatives for two proposals in the area of Future Internet.
Ad.3. Privacy institute is of interest for ISOC-ECC. ISOC-ECC is asked to send a person to represent ISOC-ECC. It is recommended to be ISOC-ECC member from research or university institutions. Borka to contact the membership.
Ad.4. The two years mandate that was approved on the VGA of the current Execom is expiring this year. It was decided a Call for candidate to be issued by March 20th. Closing of the call should be one month later, April 20th and membership will be invited to vote. The voting period must close by the end of May 2007. Rudi will provide the documents and material from the last election in support of the preparation of this year elections. Next GA should be a year after the second GA and this is the period of October/November 2007.
Ad.5 Incorporation of the rest of the Chapter. Currently only three chapters are registered as founders of the ISOC-ECC legal bodies. Action should follow for the rest of membership to be registered in the ISOC-ECC legal documents. Action to be carried out by Eric Thompson.
Ad.6 ICANN/EURALO and ISOC-ECC. As Sebastien did not provide a written document for the relationship and the next meeting of this organization of formation is in Lisbon this month it was decided ISOC-ECC to propose collaboration and coordination with this organization and exchange of liaison officer from each organization to the other one. This relationship could be formulated as a bilateral agreement that will specify the cooperation in matter that are of interest for both organizations. Rudi and Andrès to discuss this at the meeting and to contact Portugese experts for setting up Portugal Chapter.
Ad.7 the new recognized chapters from ISOC e.g. Romania, Macedonia and Serbia should be imitated to join ISOC-ECC. Invitation to be mailed by Borka. Rudi will contact U.K, Scotland, Switzerland and Ireland Chapter and invite them to join.
Ad.8 ISOC-ECC members will be invited to propose action and activities that needs small financial support as an input to the financial plan to be discussed in the next GA. New brochure with correct text should be printed in higher number that one delivered at eChallenge conference.
1. AJB and AO to contact Arturo Serra. AJB to contact ISOC DE.
2. BJB to contact the membership regarding ISOC-ECC representative to the Privacy Institute Initiative.
3.Incorporation of the members in the ISOC-ECC legal documents, action to be performed by ET.
4. Election of the Execom. Document preparation. Task for RV.
5. RV and AO to contact EURALO regarding possible cooperation and coordination of work, exchange of liaison officers and setting up bilateral agreement.
6. Invitation of European chapters to join, BJB and RV.
7. Call for proposal for activities and actions to the membership to be considered for the financial plan (RV) and the next GA.
Minutes of the ISOC-ECC EXECOM MEETING 17.5.2006, at 14:30, Skype tool for the audio-conference
Presence: Borka Jerman-Blaži?, Andres Oliva, Rudi Vansnick
- Adoption of the last audio conference meeting (all)
- Action points accomplishment (all)
- ISOC-ECC Registration process (Andres), adoption of the official name of the association
- ISOC.EU domain for ISOC-ECC (Rudi)
- WEB status (liaison, membership to other bodies) and the mailing lists (Andres, Rudi)
- PRAG ISOC for Europe (Borka)
- Observer status to ISOC-ECC (Borka)
- Further promotion of ISOC-ECC
- GA proposal for Barcelona this fall (e-Challenge conference)
- Task and commitments (all)
The Minutes were adopted.
Action point no1: Andres and Eric to contact ISOC Wallonie and to urge the deliver of the correct documents to Andres, dead line ASAP. Done
Action point 2: Andres and Rudi to finalize the migration of ISOC-ECC server and services, dead line, April 15th. Done
Action point 3: Rudi to contact ISOC Netherlands and start the procedure. Dead line 15 of April, Done
Action point 4:Andres to prepare the draft Press Release by the end of the week. Rudi to take care for immediate publishing on the ISOC-ECC Web site and for mailing to respective media and EU Institutions. Done
Action point 5. Borka to contact Patrick and ask him for re-initiation of the procedure. Done
Action point 6. Andres to prepare the content of the leaflet by the end of May. All to investigate cost of printing. Dead line end of June. ON GOING
Action point 7: Borka to prepare draft Agenda by end of April and the proposal to be mailed to the membership. Done – proposed at the Execom meeting.
Action point 8: Borka to contact Michael Nieble in the Commission and the Director of International relations Unit in European Parliament, dr.Štokelj, Andres to contact Mr. Michael Remark at European Council. Dead line: ASAP and on-going. Done, planned visit to Mr.Nieble in June.
Action point 9:Rudi to contact SAFER INTERNET project/program and explore the possibility of inclusion of ISOC-ECC in the project/program. Dead line: ASAP. The call is in June. ON GOING
Action point 10 : IGF, WSIS et al. To be put on the Agenda of GA. Dead line: in line with Agenda preparation. ON GOING
Action point 11: Greeting letter to be sent to the ISOC FR in occasion of their anniversary. Eric to write the letter in the name of ISOC-ECC and mail it, dead line middle of May. ????
The incorporation is closing to the end. The final requested document is a document signed by the chair to the Spanish Authority for ID and TAX number for ISOC-ECC.
The official name of the Association is: ISOC – European Chapters Coordinating Council. The brand name of the Association: Internet Society Europe or ISOC Europe.
Action item No.1 Andres to prepare the document, sign it and mail it to the Spanish Authority. Date: ASAP
Action item 2. Rudi to introduce the correct name in all documents, web site pages and logos of the Association. Rudi to send the proposal for new logo reflecting this decisions. Date: End of May.
The process should be finished by an agreement document specifying that the ISOC.EU domain ownership is passed from ISOC – NL to ISOC Europe. In case of disapearence of ISOC Europe the domain will be given back to ISOC-NL
Action item 3. Andres to formulate the agreement document between ISOC-NL and ISOC Europe, Rudi to provide the signatures and to mail the document to EURid. Date: ASAP
The discussion was long. The WEB site is far to be perfect, but the EXECOM is working on its improvement. The following actions should be done by the webmaster:
Action item 4. Provide links for the organization where ISOC Europe is a member (ICSTB and EURid), all documents before the incorporation of the legal entity to be saved and arhived in the arhives, three documents to act as main documents (Minutes from Barcelona meeting in 2004, the signed letter of agreement by ISOC Reston in 2006, the results of the ISOC-ECC VGA in 2005). The meetings and minutes from 2006 to be separated in a a folder under title »Meetings«. Rudi to informe the members about the names of the Council mailing list and make the list visible on the web pages. Rudi to provide links to the data in the data base and make them visible.
Action 5. Rudi to contact ICANN At Large during the metting in Frankfurt in May this year and to prepare a letter for ISOC Europe membership. Date: end of May
It was agreed ISOC Europe to send to names to ISOC for the PRAG Europe. These names are: Sebastian Bacholet and Borka Jerman-Blazic
Action point 6. Borka to write letter to Lyn and informe about our proposal for PRAG Europe.
The observer status is not specified in ISOC-ECC legal documents. The appearance of this status for some chapters at the web page should be explained.
Action point 7. Rudi to specify that this status was granted before the period of the incorporation of the ISOC-ECC legal entity and as such has just historical meaning.
Further promotion of ISOC Europe is necessary. Leaflet will be produced in the fall and first project proposals are planned for 2006 and 2007. eChallenge conference will be also used for introduction of ISOC Europe. Participation in EU activities of all Council members is wellcomed.
Action point 8. On going action point 6 from the last meeting
Action point 9. Rudi and Andres to prepare project proposal for the ISOC call. The issue addressed: setting new Chapters in other European countries (Portugal, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Moldavia, Croatia, Bosnia ect.) and issuing newsletter. Date: end of May
The idea having GA in October in Barcelona was aproved. It is necessary the Council members to meet each other face to face at least every second year. The venue will be in the new headquaters of ISOC Europe. All members are invited, but they can attend the GA via video-conference in case they do not come. The following tentative Agenda was adopted:
- Consolidation of the association
- Annual report of the Execom
- Adoption of the report (report of the assets – Rudi as treasurer)
- Strategy and plan – What exactly ISOC-ECC want to be
- Observer status to ISOC ECC
- Relations to ISOC Reston
- Participation in other Forums and organizations
- Next steps and plans
Action point 10. Borka to mail the invitation to the members. Date: June 20
Action point 11. Andres to investigate the cost of hotel accomodation for the delegates:Date June 15
Action point 12. Andres and Borka to explore the cooperation with eChallenge conference: Date: end of June
Tasks are specified in Action points
Next meeting: end of June.
The meeting was closed at 16:00
Action item No.1 Andres to prepare the TAX number request document, sign it and mail it to the Spanish Authority. Date: ASAP
Action item No. 2. Rudi to introduce the correct name of ISOC-ECC in all documents, web site pages and logos of the Association. Rudi to send the proposal for new logo reflecting this decisions. Date: End of May.
Action item No.3. Andres to formulate the agreement document between ISOC-NL and ISOC Europe, Rudi to provide the signatures and to mail the document to EURid. Date: ASAP
Action item No. 4. Provide links for the organization where ISOC Europe is a member (ICSTB and EURid), all documents before the incorporation of the legal entity to be saved and arhived in the arhives, three documents to act as main documents (Minutes from Barcelona meeting in 2004, the signed letter of agreement by ISOC Reston in 2006, the results of the VGA in 2005). The meetings and minutes from 2006 to be separated in a a folder under title »Meetings«. Rudi to informe the members about the names of the Council mailing list and make the list visible on the web pages. Rudi to provide links to the data in the data base and make them visible.
Action item No.5. Rudi to contact ICANN At Large during the metting in Frankfurt in May this year and to prepare aletter for ISOC Europe membership. Date: end of May
Action item No. 6. Borka to write letter to Lyn and informe about our proposal for PRAG Europe.
Action item No.7. Rudi to specify that this status was granted before the period of the incorporation of the legal entity and as such has just historical meaning.
Action item No.8. On going action point 6 from the last meeting
Action point No. 9. Rudi and Andres to prepare project proposal for the ISOC call. The issue addressed: setting new Chapters in other European countries (Portugal, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Moldavia, Croatia, Bosnia ect.) and issuing newsletter. Date: end of May
Action item No.10. Borka to mail the invitation to the members. Date: June 20
Action item No. 11. Andres to investigate the cost of hotel accomodation for the delegates:Date June 15
Action item 12. Andres and Borka to explore the cooperation with eChallenge conference: Date: end of June
Minutes of the ISOC-Execom meeting
Date: 9.3.2006 (first meeting in 2006), start of the meeting: 12:00 CET
Venue: Skype conference
Presence: Eric Tomson, Rudi Vansnick, Andres Oliva and Borka Jerman-Blazic
ISOC-ECC has 20 members, one more from the initiative meeting in Barcelona 2004.
Execom has 3 elected members and an appointed member. Borka Jerman-Blazic, chair, Andres Oliva, vice-chair, Eric Tomson, secretary and Rudi Vansnick, treasurer, responsible for the maintaining the content of WEB pages of ISOC-ECC. Patrick Vande Walle is liaison officer for EURid. Incorporation was somehow delayed due to incomplete documents sent by ISOC-Wallonie.
Action point 1: Andres and Eric to contact ISOC Wallonie and to urge the deliver of the correct documents to Andres, dead line ASAP.
Services, mailing lists and Web pages as well DNS to be moved to the host location in Barcelona, latest 15 of April. The list of ISOC-ECC and ISOC-ECC Execom will be not moderated, the only filter to the list will be membership of the list. In case of no member of the list needs to post message the message should go to the Chair. On the WEB pages of ISOC-ECC there will be published procedure for posting of messages to the ISOC-ECC mailing list of non-members of the list but members of particular European ISOC Chapter. This posting should be allowed and possible for every ISOC member of ISOC-ECC Chapter member.
Action point 2: Andres and Rudi to finalize the migration of ISOC-ECC server and services, dead line, April 15th.
ISOC-ECC should start the procedure of re-allocation of the procedure for registration of ISOC.EU from ISOC Netherlands.
Action point 3: Rudi to contact ISOC Netherlands and start the procedure. Dead line 15 of April
ISOC-ECC should issue a Press Release about latest achievement – setting up of Regional European ISOC organization as independent legal body and ownership of the IPR of ISOC brand name for Europe.
Action point 4:Andres to prepare the draft Press Release by the end of the week. Rudi to take care for immediate publishing on the ISOC-ECC Web site and for mailing to respective media and EU Institutions.
It was decided the procedure for membership to the EURID and to the EURid board to be re-initiated in context of the new body existence.
Action point 5. Borka to contact Patrick and ask him for re-initiation of the procedure.
ISOC-ECC is expecting to receive 20 000 EUR from the hosting body sponsorship in 2006, however they will be available only after the registration procedure is over (expected in end of June). It was agreed leaflet to be prepared for printing and later dissemination. The number of leaflets cca 2000. The leaflet content will be the presentation of ISOC-ECC, its mission, membership, invitation for membership, addresses, contact points ect. The leaflet should be available for the e-Challenge conference in October and be printed after the legal body become operational.
Action point 6: Andres to prepare the content of the leaflet by the end of May. All to investigate cost of printing. Dead line end of June.
The proposal to hold GA in October in Barcelona was welcomed as the event of eChallenge Conference is an event sponsored by the EU Commission where responsible people might be met. The event in absence of IST event is the best event to introduce ISOC-ECC to European audience and this opportunity should not be missed. Besides, Barcelona is the seat of ISOC-ECC. New offices should be presented to the membership. The possibility should be presented to the membership and a proposal for the GA with Agenda should be mailed.
Action point 7: Borka to prepare draft Agenda by end of April and the proposal to be mailed to the membership.
All members are invited to contribute with ideas for fund rising and make ISOC-ECC alive. One of the possibilities are the community funded projects and similar activities. Talks with responsible people are welcomed.
Action point 8: Borka to contact Michael Nieble in the Commission and the Director of International relations Unit in European Parliament, dr.Štokelj, Andres to contact Mr. Michael Remark at European Council. Dead line: ASAP and on-going.
Action point 9:Rudi to contact SAFER INTERNET project/program and explore the possibility of inclusion of ISOC-ECC in the project/program. Dead line: ASAP
Liaison and contact with ISOC Reston will be maintained by Borka. Liaison officer from ISOC Reston is David Mc Auley who replaced Nelson Sanchez as he left ISOC Reston. Participation in international forums like IGF, WSIS should be discussed at the GA and appropriate stand point agreed. It was also proposed members representing their Chapters on these events to be called and an agreement achieved they to wear also the heat of ISOC-ECC.
Action point 10: IGF, WSIS et al. To be put on the Agenda of GA. Dead line: in line with Agenda preparation.
Action point 11: Greeting letter to be sent to the ISOC FR in occasion of their anniversary. Eric to write the letter in the name of ISOC-ECC and mail it, dead line middle of May.
The meeting was closed at 14:00
- Andres and Eric to contact ISOC Wallonie and to urge the deliver of the correct documents to Andres, dead line ASAP.
- Andres and Rudi to finalize the migration of ISOC-ECC server and services, dead line, April 15th.
- Rudi to contact ISOC Netherlands and start the procedure. Dead line 15 of April
- Andres to prepare the draft Press Release by the end of the week. Rudi to take care for immediate publishing on the ISOC-ECC Web site and for mailing to respective media and EU Institutions.
- Borka to contact Patrick and ask him for re-initiation of the procedure.
- Andres to prepare the content of the leaflet by the end of May. All to investigate cost of printing. Dead line end of June.
- Borka to prepare draft Agenda by end of April and the proposal to be mailed to the membership.
- Borka to contact Michael Nieble in the Commission and the Director of International relations Unit in European Parliament, dr.Štokelj, Andres to contact Mr. Michael Remark at European Council. Dead line: ASAP and on-going.
- Rudi to contact SAFER INTERNET project/program and explore the possibility of inclusion of ISOC-ECC in the project/program. Dead line: ASAP
- IGF, WSIS et al. To be put on the Agenda of GA. Dead line: in line with Agenda preparation.
- Greeting letter to be sent to the ISOC FR in occasion of their anniversary. Eric to write the letter in the name of ISOC-ECC and mail it, dead line middle of May.
Reply from ETNO to the European ISOC chapters’ Statement on ETNO Contribution 109 to CWG-WCIT12, received 24 September 2012
See ETNO Digital Alert for HTML version.
To Mr R. Rustema (coordinator)
Internet Society European Coordinating Council
c/ Carme 47, 08001, Barcelona, Spain
cc: European Commission, Current Presidency of the CEPT and the EP
(PPE, S&D, ALDE, Verts, GUE/NGL, ECR, EFD)
RE: Your letter of 14 September 2012 / CWG-WCIT12 Contribution 109 Source: ETNO
Dear Mr Rustema,
I have read with great interest the letter you have addressed to my attention concerning the ETNO proposal for the revision of the ITU ITRs. In your letter you raise a number of concerns, shared by the European Chapters of the Internet Society, that you hope will bring ETNO to reconsider its current position.
Having taken into consideration the arguments you have developed, and the consequent reaction that you will find hereunder, I confirm that ETNO is all the more convinced of its position and will continue to defend it in the public discussions on ITRs revision, as well as in the appropriate institutional and public fora.
Multi-stakeholder participation in Europe: As you rightly point out, as far as Internet governance issues are concerned, ETNO has supported the multi-stakeholder approach, and will continue to do so. The positive elements of such approach are well acknowledged by ETNO and we are convinced that fora such as the IGF will keep contributing substantially to the multi-stakeholder debate on all Internet governance issues.
To this extent, we believe that ETNO’s proposal on ITRs review is not against this model. On the contrary, it strengthens the principles of openness, transparency and multi-stakeholder discussion on issues that are very important for a solid and future-proof development of the Internet, in the interest of citizens, of all stakeholders of the digital value chain and, ultimately, of society as a whole. ETNO is committed to ensure the highest possible level of transparency for its proposals and is genuinely open to a multi-stakeholder dialogue, keeping however in mind that the ITRs revision is an institutional process that needs discussions and negotiations within the appropriate institutional bodies and organizations. On this point, we are surprised that the ISOC has tried to block the ETNO proposal, thereby preventing a full and open discussion on it.
The scope of the International Telecom Regulations: The ISOC stresses that the ITRs regulate relations between governments. ETNO agrees on this point. However, since the 1988 revision, we all know the telecommunications world has changed and the digital industry is today radically different from the telecommunications industry of the 1980s. As ETNO has made very clear since its submission to CEPT, the revision of the ITRs could foresee the inclusion of some principles that, in full respect of the competences of jurisdictions and regulatory bodies around the world – including of course the EU – will help the development of the Internet and enhance consumers welfare in the digital sector. Indeed, the ITU is the only globally recognized telecoms organization where all countries are actively involved. The ITRs treaty is therefore the only truly global treaty on telecoms and, as such, ETNO sees the ITRs as a fitting ‘home’ for the principles that it wishes to see introduced during the revision process.
Network neutrality: ETNO fully supports the principle of an open Internet and does not believe that its proposal could hamper, to any extent, the “principle of an open internet” and “the quality of “best effort service delivery”. By contrast, ETNO’s proposal aims at providing the inclusion in the ITRs of a forward-looking principle regarding the value of “commercial agreements”. This will contribute, in the years to come, to the development of new advanced services to consumers, based on QoS, for the benefit of all societies around the world. In particular, reading the statements made by the Internet Society European Coordinating Council, we would like to point out the following considerations:
- the key goal of Net Neutrality principles and of an Open Internet is the ability to send and receive, over the Internet, any content and to have access to any web site/IP address;
- Net Neutrality is, in general, not related to the IP connectivity performance but to connectivity only in extreme situations such as the block of IP addresses or web sites.
Differentiated QoS (such as the priority given to specific type of content) is related to the service requirements not to Net Neutrality. As an example, real time video streaming is needed for some specific services and it is crystal clear that the performance of real time streaming cannot be provided (due to evident cost issues) to any IP traffic. According to the Internet Society statement, no differentiated quality should be provided for real time video streaming and then many of the services today offered by OTTs/CPs should not be allowed.
- Moreover it must be taken into account that differentiated QoS has always been used in the public Internet and today the need for QoS delivery is growing. No claim was ever made on QoS delivery against Net Neutrality. Examples of differentiatedQoS are: use of CDN, use of ADN, web acceleration, caching, buffering for some of the contents. Google, Akamai, L3/GX, Limelight and many other OTTs/CPs/Aggregators/CDN Providers are using differentiated QoS for some traffic and then, according to the Internet Society statement these companies are hurting freedom of communication and are against Net Neutrality.
The previous points give evidence that commercial agreements with differentiated QoS delivery are widely used over the Internet.
With reference to the statement on “quality of best effort delivery threatened by differentiated QoS”, we would like to point out the following scenario:
- The internet ecosystem is open and competitive. In every country many ISPs compete to get more market share and to get more end user paying for broadband and ultrabroadband internet access service.
- Differentiated QoS is not provided to all internet traffic, it is used only for the high value traffic (i.e. for the traffic that gives revenues to OTT/CP). The “not high value traffic” is delivered by best effort.
- Telcos end users receive both best effort and differentiated QoS traffic.
According to this scenario it is crystal clear that, if a Telco operator does not give good performance for best effort traffic delivery, it will lose clients and market share due to the high competition among ISPs.
The previous points give evidence that commercial arrangements with differentiated QoS do no threaten the quality of best effort delivery.
ETNO wants to avoid decisions that would prevent new business models from emerging or that would hamper differentiated offers, hence limiting consumer choice. The risk of undesirable economic and technical regulation of operator rates, terms and conditions will be much higher if the development of the Internet continues to be jeopardized by the lack of sustainability and/or by the lack of end-customer satisfaction.
On many occasions ETNO members have reiterated their commitment to sustain an open Internet and to continue enabling consumers to access services and applications of their choice, as well as guaranteeing complete transparency about terms, conditions and limitations. As recognized by the European Commission, operators should not be prevented from developing differentiated offers based on customer needs, in addition to the best effort Internet. It is important to note that nobody will be cut off from the Internet as the best effort Internet will continue to exist and to evolve. New business models based on differentiated offers will ultimately create more choice for consumers.
“Sending party network pays”: ETNO is not proposing to use SPNP model as the founding principle for IP interconnection. ETNO proposal is based on commercial agreements between parties, therefore the SPNP approach is not imposed, but can be used when commercially suitable.
To present examples, SPNP model could be used for:
- Telco-to-Telco peering agreements with a threshold
- Telco-to-OTT/CP interconnection, where paid peering is adopted; paid peering is generally used when OTT/CP have to terminate high-value traffic such as commercial movies. A well-known example is the Netflix/Level3/Comcast agreement, that moved from “free on net” interconnection to paid peering between Level 3 and Comcast.
On your final remark (Economic considerations, “fair remuneration” and broadband investment), we would like to highlight that ETNO represents the major investors in broadband deployment in the EU and acknowledges the beneficial role of a competitive and liberalized market in providing better services for citizens. By recognizing the value of such principles, the ETNO proposal is fully in line with the ongoing process of market liberalization and is in no way against the principles defined in liberal legal policy and regulatory frameworks, as is the EU framework for electronic communications and services.
On the contrary, the advocacy of a principle that would recognize, at the international level, the role of commercial agreements, is in itself a liberal principle. In fact, it would help prevent that ITU members could one day approve legislation that might result into blocking a liberal and successful development of the Internet and digital industries.
The ETNO proposal calls for a new IP interconnection ecosystem that provides end-to-end Quality of Service delivery, in addition to best effort delivery, enabling the provision of value-added network services, to both end-customers and OTT players and content providers. Moreover, the contribution states that, in order to ensure an adequate return on investment in high bandwidth infrastructures, operators shall negotiate commercial agreements to achieve a sustainable compensation for telecommunications services.
By endorsing the concept of “quality based delivery”, it will be possible to establish new interconnection policies based on the differentiation of the QoS parameters for specific services and types of traffic (not only on the “volume”), enabling new business models and implementing an ecosystem where operators’ revenues will not be disconnected from investment needs. The ETNO proposal is not imposing any premium service obligations on network operators, since the QoS delivery will be based only on commercial agreements.
Indeed, the ETNO contribution aims at creating the best enabling environment to foster commercial agreements based on QoS delivery and to avoid any regulations that can prevent the development of these agreements.
In view of the points explained above, we are confident that the ISOC will change its opinion on ETNO’s proposal and will share our active commitment towards innovation and our interest in defending principles that will help the Internet to evolve towards better services for consumers and higher societal welfare.
ETNO Executive Board Chairman
The question of the quorum and voting rules stipulated in the ECC Bylaws has been a thorn in the flesh if not a bone of contention for as long as I have been associated with the ECC. No meeting, face to face or on line, has been, strictly speaking ‘quorate’ since at least the General Assembly convened in Barcelona in October 2006, if not before.
This situation has led me to the conclusion, some time ago, that the problem is not with the ECC and its members, but with the Bylaws themselves. Indeed, a quorum requirement of 75% of voting members is excessive, and in practice not realisable, certainly face-to-face, even on-line. It will have to be rectified. The additional requirement of at least 10 Chapters’ representatives present, is consequently currently redundant. More than 10 Chapters (equivalent to about 20-25 votes) are required to meet the current quorum (29 votes).
Meanwhile, may I recall that the Ley Organico 5852 of 1/2002, stipulates that:
- the accounts of the association are approved annually by the General Assembly (Article 14.3) and that
- decisions of the General Assembly are taken by ‘simple majority’ (Article 12 (d) ).
Consequently, although the Loi Organico does envisage a quorum (undefined) in Article 7 (h), I find it quite inconvenient that the peculiar quorum specified in the ECC has repeatedly rendered conformance to the requirements of the Law virtually impossible, and this over a period of years.
Also, the super-majority (75% of the Group) required for the least amendment to the Bylaws is naturally problematic. (Article XI, paragraph 1)
The following notes examine in more detail the particular stipulations of our current ECC Bylaws:
At present (July 2012), 24 Chapters are mentioned on the website. Of which:
- – three are observers (England, Serbia, Switzerland) and do not vote.
- – two are in reformation (Norway and Turkey) and are not counted as members in good standing with ISOC.
- – among the Spanish Chapters, Aragon and Galicia appear to be dormant. But for present purposes, they are still included among the voting members. They are recognised on the ISOC.org website.Consequently the official membership of ECC is 19 Chapters (July 2012).
2. The Voting ‘Group’
The ECC Bylaws provide for two votes per Chapter (one each if there are more than one Chapter per country.) In addition, the ISOC delegate has one vote and each elected officer has one vote. (Article VI, paragraph 3.)
Thus the voting Group is 13 Chapters with 2 votes and 6 Chapters with one vote each plus one vote each for the 4 officers. The voting group is 38 votes.
3. The Quorum
The quorum is 75% of the “Group”, (and at least 10 Chapter members). That is 29 votes (Three quarters of 38 votes). Article XI, paragraph 4.
– For amendments to the Bylaws, the whole quorum, including the Officers, must be in favour of an amendment. Article XI paragraph 1. That is, 29 votes, have to vote in favour.
– For the formal creation of Committees (Article IX, paragraph 1), a two thirds majority of the quorum (26 votes) may direct the Chair. (This has not been done on any occasion during the past six years.)
– For the approval of the appointment of the Nominating Committee a two thirds majority of the quorum (26 votes) is required. Article IX, paragraph 2). (This has been achieved on a nem-con – i.e. ‘Silence vaut accord’ – on more than one occasion.)
– To elect an Officer, a simple majority of the Voting members present is sufficient (Article XI, paragraph 7.) Irrespective of the quorum. (That is the basis on which successive Election Committees aka Nominating Committes, have conducted elections.)
– To dissolve the Council (Article XIII), a unanimous vote by the four Officers and a simple majority vote (currently 19 votes, assuming all voting members are present) in a meeting convened for this purpose, is required. (Curiously, such majority might be achieved with fewer than a quorum of members (10), whereas any one Officer is able to block a dissolution.)
– For all other matters, ‘unless otherwise specified’, a simple majority of the Voting Members present (i.e. Excluding the Officers) is sufficient (Article XI, paragraph 7), irrespective of the quorum. This is important since such decisions would override the requirement for a quorum, and permit conformity with the requirements of the Law (see above.)
N.B. The ECC Bylaws do NOT specify any matters such as e.g. the Financial Report, the Budget, the report from the Executive Committee etc. which are approved in the General Assembly by a simple majority of the members present.
4. Conclusion and Comments
At the on-line General Assembly, on 13 July 2012, at the beginning of the meeting, the Group present accounted for 12 Voting Chapters present and for 24 votes, among the voting members of the Group. Only three or four Chapters were lacking to attain the quorum of 29 votes, stipulate in the ECC Bylaws.
More than 10 Chapters were present. Since all the points on the agenda were, in the language of the Bylaws other matters, “unless otherwise specified”, one may conclude that the General Assembly on 13 July was fully capable to take decison for all matters that were before it.
The General Assembly was not required to take any action (e.g. revise the bylaws, create committees, appoint the nominating committee) which would have required a two thirds or a three quarters majority of the quorum.
More generally, I would also stress the importance of all member Chapters to attend all meetings to which they are convened. Bearing in mind that it is a simple matter to designate a proxy to excercise the Chapter’s obligation to participate and to vote when necessary.
Chair ISOC-ECC 2007-2012 23 July 2012