Hello SM,
Thank you for the update, and thank you for representing the MIU.
It is indeed encouraging for us, users, to know that there are such
meetings being organised.
Thanks and Regards,
*RAMGOLAM Sandeep*
*Front-end Developer - Designer - Web Enthusiast - Gamer**Website :*
barfii.net <
http://www.barfii.net>
On 26 February 2015 at 17:57, S Moonesamy <sm+mu_at_elandsys.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I attended a meeting of the Multi-Stakeholder Forum this afternoon. The
> meeting was chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of
> Technology, Communication and Innovation. The people in attendance were
> asked to introduced themselves as there were some new persons attending
> this meeting. There were officials from the Ministry, the National
> Computer Board, the Government Online Centre, representatives from
> Mauritius Telecom and Data Communications Limited, the Vice-President of
> the local Chapter of the Internet Society, and Benoit Gentil who is a local
> .mu registrar. The manager of the .mu ccTLD registry was at the Ministry.
> However, he did not attend the meeting.
>
> Please note that my notes of the discussions may not be entirely correct.
> The atmosphere was cordial. An official from the Ministry mentioned that
> the Ministry did not have an idea of the multi-stakeholder forum was
> supposed to work. Mr Dabeesing from the Information and Communication
> Technologies Authority presented a problem statement. He explained that
> the current law is in breach of international best practices for ccTLDs.
> The Information and Communication Technologies Authority proposed the
> following as a way forward:
>
> - Removal of the Internet Management Committee as defined in the ICT Act
> 2001
>
> - Formalizing the Mauritius Internet Community
>
> A non-profit structure with a neutral status and memeber drive, to avoid
> conflict of interest, was proposed. There was a discussion about how to
> formalize the Mauritius Internet Community.
>
> This was the third meeting of the Multi-Stakeholder Forum. The first
> meeting was helpd in October 2013 and the second one in May 2014. The
> objective of the forum is to get input and the formal buy-in of the Local
> Internet Community. The Information and Communication Technologies
> Authority proposed to set up a .mu council. Mr Dabeesing then presented a
> proposed framework ( http://www.elandsys.com/~sm/
> mu-governance-model-020614.doc ).
>
> The Permanent Secretary expressed his concern about .mu. He commented
> that the re-delegation concerns all the internet users in Mauritius, that
> it is a long journey and that he would like to consult everyone as this
> should not be government-driven. The Permanent Secretary asked whether the
> stakeholders shared the same concern as the government and that, if there
> is a common purpose, we could move ahead. He mentioned that Mr Yann Kwok
> asked twenty-five million rupees for gov.mu. However, Mr Yann Kwok did
> explain how he came up with that amount. The Permanent Secretary commented
> that it is a problem specific to the government. He explained that the
> government was not in a position to use gov.mu and that is why it is
> using govmu.org. He then commented that the problem affecting gov.mu can
> affect others sectors. The Permanent Secretary commented that any
> agreement with Mr Yann Kwok would not be tied to the re-delegation effort.
>
> Mr Radhakisoon, from the local Chapter of the Internet Society, commented
> that he was ill at ease to discuss about commercial issues in the absence
> of a party. Mr Ramalingum, from Data Communications Limited, commented
> that discussion specific to gov.mu was not relevant to the meeting. I
> agreed that gov.mu issues should be kept separate from .mu issues and
> that the gov.mu issues was not a matter for the forum to discuss about.
>
> Mr Radhakisoon mentioned that he was a bit scared about going into a a
> re-delegation process. He mentioned that a re-delegation should not be
> done just to replace the current ccTLD manager. Mr Dabeesing mentioned
> that this multistakholder forum will at some point be the new administrator
> of the .mu ccTLD.
>
> The Permanent Secretary commented that, in reply to a Parliamentary
> Question, the Ministry stated that it will be applying for a
> re-delegation. He mentioned that it has initiated the process but it does
> not want to be seen as leading the effort. It was not clear how to move
> forward.
>
> After some discussions the Permanent Secretary agreed that a small select
> committee should be set up to work on the problem and then it can reach out
> to a larger group. The name of Mr Radhakisoon was suggested to lead the
> committee. As Mr Radhakisoon preferred not to do it, I volunteered to lead
> the committee and it was accepted. I was asked for a deadline for
> producing work and I mentioned end of March. The committee will have the
> following members:
>
> Mr Radhakisoon
> Mr Ramalingum representing Internet Service Providers, MITIA and OTAM
> Mr Dabeesing representing the ICTA (Secretary)
> Mr Gentil presenting the local .mu registrars
> Myself representing the Local Internet Community
>
> The Permanent Secretary stated that the Ministry will be providing
> secretarial services and that the committee can use the conference room of
> the Ministry for its meetings if the room is booked in advance. He also
> requested that the committee includes a representative from universities
> and a representative from the private sector (e.g. MCCI).
>
> During the meeting, I suggested holding some information sessions about
> the .mu ccTLD as the discussions pointed to a lack of information about the
> issues. I suggested that proposals about what to do could be discussed
> after that as people will then have a better understanding of the matter.
>
> There were questions about whether a re-delegation is possible and whether
> it requires the agreement of the current ccTLD manager. I commented that
> it would have helped if there were such an agreement. However, that does
> not mean that a re-delegation is not possible without the agreement of the
> current ccTLD manager. I commented that the objective should be to get the
> consensus of the Local Internet Community. I also mentioned that it would
> be better to resolve the .mu issues first as gov.mu falls under .mu.
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>
>
>
Received on Thu Feb 26 2015 - 14:26:11 PST