DC-CIV / At-Large - Core Internet Values: Evolution and Challenges for ICANN

5:11PM Mar 12, 2025

Speakers:

Vint Cerf

Pari Esfandiari

Tijani Ben Jamaa,

Preetam Maloor - ITU

Avri Doria

Keywords:

Core internet values

ICANN

digital sovereignty

multi-stakeholder model

global interoperability

internet governance

digital security

user-centricity

technical community

policy making

internet infrastructure

data protection

AI and blockchain

public engagement

political dynamics.

Wait This session will now begin. Please start the recording.

Recording in progress.

All right, thank you. Hello and welcome everyone to the at large plenary one core internet values evolution and challenges for ICANN. My name is Michelle Deidre, and I am the remote participation manager for this session today. Please note that this session is being recorded and governed by the ICANN expected standards of behavior and ICANN community anti harassment policy during this session, questions or comments will only be read aloud if submitted within the Q and A pod interpretation for this session will include English, French and Spanish. If you would like to speak during this session, please raise your hand in zoom. When called upon, virtual participants will be given permission to unmute in zoom on site. Participants will use a physical microphone to speak. Please state your name for the record the language you will speak if speaking a language other than English, and please speak at a reasonable pace. And with this, I will hand the floor over to pari Esfandiari, a life member.

Thank you, and a very warm welcome to everyone joining us in person or virtually for this discussion on core internet values evolution and changes for ICANN various terms, invariance, architectural principles and structural rules describe these values, but they share the same foundation. Rather than debating terminology, we focus on their significance, the threats they face, and how to preserve or adapt them in today's digital landscape. Slide three, please. The internet's core values have shaped it into a global platform for communication, commerce and innovation. These include global connectivity, which transcend national and regional boundaries, please show next slide, interoperability, which enables seamless communication between systems, fostering universal access and innovation openness, which supports free access to information innovation and expression without unnecessary restrictions, decentralization, meaning no single entity controls the internet, except for the naming, directory system DNS, which ensures reliability and predictability the End to End principle, which allows direct, unfiltered communication between users, without intermediaries, robustness and reliability, ensuring continued functionality despite technical, political or economic disruptions and freedom from harm, a concept developed over the past decade to reflect the need for an internet that is safe and secure, protecting users from threat, exploitation and abuse. No slide these values did not emerge overnight. They developed organically over decades, shaped by technical innovation, governance debates and real world pressures as win CERF and other pioneers have noted, the Internet was not conceived as a political statement, but as a solution to the challenges of building an efficient, scalable and resilient network. At its core, it was meant to foster global cooperation and knowledge sharing, a vision that is more critical than ever in two days, challenge, changing digital order, marked by geopolitical tensions, regulatory fragmentation and rapid technological shifts no longer just a tool for communication. Internet has become a battleground for economic power, national security and political influence. Governments are asserting control under the banner of digital sovereignty, threatening global interoperability, while each while tech giants create walled gardens that limit user choice and challenge decentralization, emerging technologies like aI blockchain and quantum computing bring both opportunities and governance Challenges. Algorithmic decision making raises concerns about bias and transparency, while blockchain disrupts traditional governance models. Meanwhile, ICANN multi stakeholder approach faces mounting scrutiny, with growing calls for state led intervention as the steward of the internet unique identifiers. ICANN plays a vital role in preserving global interoperability, but faces increasing pressure. Some governments seek greater control over domain name systems, while others question the multi stakeholder model amid rising regulation, ICANN must also define its roles in security AI and the decentralized identity systems. As the digital landscape evolves with visas plus 20 in 2025 global internet governance is at a turning point. Can core internet be preserved while adapting to shifting geopolitical and technological realities? Can ICANN uphold these principles amid growing state and corporate pressures? These questions are especially critical for the at large community as end users bear the greater impact restricted access, higher cost, reduced privacy and diminished agency over the Internet's future, the choices made today will determine whether the Internet remains open and innovative or fragmented and controlled. We won't solve these challenges today, but we can define what is at stake and icann's role in shaping the path forward. Slide four, please, we are honored to welcome a distinguished panel of expert. We've got

a problem with this. I think we have the problem with the slides because we've been stuck on this one for quite some time.

So could we try to show the next slide where I show the overarching questions?

Thank you.

So we are honored to welcome a distinguished panel of experts in Internet governance. Jon, joining joining us. Virtually are wind serve and pre time Amadou, while trip designer and Olivier sepin loblond, are here in person. Their profiles. Profiles will be displayed at this sort of their interventions as they share insights on the evolution and challenges of core internet values following the panel discussion invited ICANN community members will share their perspectives on key challenges and strategies. This will be followed by an open floor for broader discussion. I will moderate the session with Alejandro pizzanti as the online moderator. Now let's begin our conversation. As you can see on this screen, we have three overarching questions that will guide our discussion today. You have two to three minutes to respond to each question. The first question is, as the internet evolves, what core values must be preserved? And I'd like to begin by addressing wind. Wind, given your pivotal role in designing the internet's foundational protocols, you have witnessed first hand how the Internet has grown and adapted. How can we navigate new challenges while safeguarding the fundamental essence of the internet as it was originally envisioned. Over to you.

This is thank you very much, by the way, for allowing me to participate. I hope I'm audible and visible. Just double checking. I'm going to switch to a slightly different network, if you'll hold on for one.

It's Olivia speaking Vince said he was switching to another network. Is that another like not the internet

signals will go to Voyager One or two and then bounce back.

And could we make sure that we show the profiles at the beginning of the intervention? Also, win doesn't need, really introduction nevertheless.

Tim. We wait for a minute if we didn't have him, we continued with someone else. I

Okay, while we are waiting for wind, maybe Olivier, you could explain which core internet values, in your opinion, are most at risk today, and how can they be safeguarded, while ensuring the original architectural principles of the Internet remains relevant in an era of decentralized finance, encrypted network and AI driven governance,

yeah. Thank you very much. Paris speaking, and thank you for organizing this this session as you know, some of the values, some of the core internet values, have somehow been changed or eroded over time. The ones I can think of the top of my head are first the openness of the internet. This open value being that you do have now more and more proprietary technologies that use the internet, and of course, the advent of AI is because of the the proprietary algorithms being used, closing somehow, this this openness. There's also the end to end principle, which originally was that you could basically put anything you wanted into the internet and it was going to connect to the other end completely. That has changed over time, first with the advent of network address translation, the NAT but then also some traffic shaping and all sorts of because of the variety of networks that you have today, the kind of filtering that that goes forth with some of the traffic. So that end to end principle is, I would say, eroded. It doesn't, hasn't disappeared altogether. It is still present in some parts of the internet. But there are some cases where you're quite restricted with the type of traffic that you can put into the internet. And then the other thing is the user Centricity of the internet, as we are seeing more and more content delivery networks and some intelligence, I think, happening on the network itself, the user has less control than it used to have in the past. So I think these are, these are a bit of a problem in some way, and we have to monitor that, because we do risk the point of having no control whatsoever, and the internet just being some kind of a content delivery network, distributing things out over to users. And that's basically it. The I think that in order to mitigate this, I think someone said the answer is legislation or regulation. And of course, we have seen some battles take place, network neutrality battles being one of them. But the trouble is that legislation first only exists on exists on a national level. And the Internet is a global resource, and it unfortunately always ends up being somehow imperfect. So it has some legislation is put in place to actually make things better, and at the end of the day, it makes things worse. So stakehold, stakeholders, in my view, should voluntarily try to uphold these core values. And when I mean stakeholders, I mean all stakeholders. So that includes government, civil society, private sector companies that propose their services on the internet, or even internet service providers. And this might be looking at the problem with, you know, rose colored glasses like everyone is happy and everyone's going to collaborate with each other. But have to remember the very reason the Internet has continued to exist and to operate like it has is because all those people involved in running the internet have collaborated together. So I hope that we can continue that. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Olivier, and now I think we have went back so Wint, would you like me to read the question again? Or are you ready to go?

No, the question is fine, and I now have been back on, I think, more reliably. I also have good audio before it was very weak so I had you did hear a little bit, I guess, of what I started with is that correct? No, no, nothing. Oh, my dear. Okay, in that case, thank you. Olivier's preamble was very much something I subscribe to. Let's just capture some of the key elements here. The first one is that the policy making in a multi stakeholder mode is absolutely vital, because we need multiple perspectives before we choose policy, especially for technology that is so central to today's societies, our social and economic environment. Second, connectivity is vital. We must be able to pass traffic from one end of the internet to the other, regardless of international and geopolitical boundaries. That was an essential, important part of the internet design, and it should remain so. I know there are sensitivities about the control of the flow of traffic, but if you're worried about access, then you should use cryptography and keys for that purpose, to control who has access to information. But the free flow of content from every part of the Internet to every other part is absolutely essential, because the Internet has become so embedded in our social and economic frameworks, it's vital that we stay user centric, which is something Olivier also emphasized, we need to be well aware of the impact that internet and its applications, including worldwide web, social media and now artificial intelligence, are having on people in the world. The impacts are going to vary from one location to another. The economic environments are different, the access environments are different. The popular applications may be different, but we have to be attentive to all of those impacts as we make and exercise policy. The last thing I will say is that accountability is becoming increasingly important in this online environment, we can no longer allow people to hide behind anonymity if they are doing harmful things, and so the veil of anonymity has to be pierced in internationally acceptable ways in order to protect people whose interests are harmed by those who exercise The power of the internet for their own benefit.

Thank you very much. With that, I turn the floor to Pritam. How do you see international regulatory framework adapting to uphold core internet values?

So thank you pari. Let me start by thanking everyone for the opportunity to speak here. And let me say it's a pleasure to be in such distinguished company. So while there is no single international regulatory framework for this, there are two key voluntary global frameworks you know, that guide our discussions, the the OG, a term I learned from my 10 year old. I think it's, it means original gangster or something, is the versus framework. And now we have the GDC, the global digital compact, you know, versus laid the foundation for shared understanding of internet governance. You know, it codified various key principles, the most important of which, of course, is the multi stakeholder model of governance. And we've been debating the Tunis Agenda bits such as, say paragraph 35 for years at forums such as, you know, especially within the UN at the ITU, the CSTD and many of these forums. But the framework gives us a basis for global dialog. You know, these frameworks are not binding, let me be clear, but they're quite powerful because they help organizations such as the ITU, UNESCO, UNCTAD and others. You know, they to help us align our work with this global principles and values. For example, at itu, our key resolutions, you know, whether it's our strategic plan, the internet resolutions, cyber security, AI and many, many more. You know our connectivity resolutions and all our work programs over the years reflect these business commitments. So this means you know that the values we set out at versus remain as relevant today as it was in 2005 you know, the need to protect an open, secure, accessible, distributed, interoperable internet for all. And these values were built on multi stakeholderism. I think it has also withstood the test of time. We just need to be sure that their interpretation and their application when it comes to new frameworks, is in line with what we've been protecting. You know, over the years, since vis so the GDC has built on this legacy, it's offered another opportunity to reaffirm our shared values. The upcoming business plus 20 review that pari you mentioned later this year will help it make further adjustments while we are charting the path forward. But I think we need to be vigilant. Thank you.

Thank you very much for that. Very insightful comments, and now I turn to tripty in the face of increasing digital sovereignty and fragmentation, how can I can uphold global interoperability while ensuring the multi stakeholder model remains vital in safeguarding internet openness.

Thank you pari for inviting me to be a part of this panel, and thank you for the question. I like the fact that you say the world is moving towards increased digital sovereignty, because that is indeed a reality. When it comes to fragmentation, I'd like to just say fragmentation means different things to different people and their layers of fragmentation. I'd like to focus on the underpinnings and technical underpinnings of the internet, which is not fragmented today. And in particular, I'd like to focus on the unique identifier systems, which, if we would like to continue to sustain as a world body. We should continue to sustain one world, one internet. We must absolutely keep this sacred. And so from an ICANN perspective, what do we do? If I could just take it back to what happens at the very base level of the internet, there's essentially just one form of transaction that occurs, which is information starts at a particular site and then and needs to end at a particular destination, and that path can only be followed, or that transaction can only happen if the bits know where they originate and where they will end. And that all goes back to the internet's unique identifier systems. So ICANN is focused solely and ensuring this unique identifier fire system remains unique and single. And in other words, we protect the zone file, so we are laser focused on that. And also, ICANN isn't a political body. We do not take sides in any kind of political discussions. We just want to ensure that the bits flow flawlessly and with integrity from point A to its destination, and we do that by ensuring that we preserve the unique identifier system so we do not we are not a political body. We ensure that we don't get politicized in any way, and so that the underpinnings of the global Internet can be relied on, and this can continue to flow. And we also ensure that, you know, a multi stakeholder body is feeding into all policies that that are being developed at ICANN. And as you can see, we have seven SOS, and as that come to this community together, and they they are the technical community in the form of ass and our sac. We have the business community, we have governments, we have, you know, end users. So we ensure that we continue to get feedback from all these different entities as policy is crafted and ultimately ratified. So it's very, very important that I can continue to listen to all the voices that need to be heard, to construct policy and to ensure that we do not fragment this internet. Do not fragment the unique identifier space. And as event was saying earlier, fragmentation does begin to occur as people look at sovereignty issues, and don't want their you know, traffic to be compromised. Well, seek other avenues, such as, you know, ensuring that you you know, use cryptography for your transmission. So there are the modalities to ensure that we maintain privacy and secure our information. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Sripti for that very insightful comments. And with that, we are now turning to the second overarching question that is, how should the internet governance community strategize and collaborate to preserve cool internet values and effectively influence policy and political dynamics, and I address that to win what lessons from past Internet governance debates such as ICANN transformation and iyona transition can help guide today's efforts to defend core values. Over to you and

thank you again for yet another very hard question. Let me first say that one of the things that we must insist on is end to end. Integrity and tripty has already mentioned that we need more tools for achieving that objective implementation of BCP 38 for example, and RPKI are very high on my agenda. Another thing that we need to remember is that the single identifier space, a unique identifier space, is fundamental to the internet's operation. We must not lose that if we allow that to just to unravel, we will end up with ambiguity, which is not our friend in this kind of environment, I think we also need to introduce more tools for the protection of user interests. We've already referenced things like cryptography and strong authentication and multi factor authentication, but I want to also argue that legal protections for the users are also a very important responsibility. ICANN does not have the responsibility for providing legal protections except for the sanctity of the IP address allocations and record keeping and also the preservation of the Association of domain names with the parties who are responsible for them and to whom they have been assigned. And so icann's processes need to be protected, and the users of the process is those who rely on them need to be protected with appropriate recourse when things are not going well, those are all things that are very vital. ICANN was not set up as a regulatory agency, and as I look at it from the perspective of 2025 it feels as if ICANN deserves more capability in that along those lines than it currently has, but it's not clear exactly how to imbue it with that capability. As a consequence, it has been faced forced to make use of contract law, more than anything else, as a way of enforcing the rules and regulations that make the it's part of the internet functional. We might want to give some thought to whether the organization should be given additional powers to achieve its objectives. I'll stop there.

Thank you very much. Went I know that you have another commitment, and therefore, rather than moving to next panelist, I want to pose our last overarching question to you so you can reach your other commitments. So the final question is, how can the internet community build public support and leverage grassroots, grassroots momentum to influence little decision making and safeguard core internet values? So when, how can we communicate the importance of core internet values to the general public in a way that drives political engagement and advocacy?

You know, while I will be happy to answer that question, it occurs to me as up in my calendar that I have some additional time my next my next meeting starts in half an hour, so I'm here for another hour. If that helps you with your agenda,

that would help a lot. So in that case, thank you very much. I moved to pre term. So how can multi lateral institutions collaborate with multi stakeholder bodies to shape policies that protect the internet's openness and operability.

Thanks again. Pari. So let me start by saying, you know, obviously, this type of collaboration between multilateral organizations and multi stakeholder bodies or even, you know, civil society, grassroots movements, it's crucial for preserving the internet's openness and interoperability. So I'm not going to get into labels and terminologies here, as you had indicated in your opening, you know. Itu also has private sector membership or industry associations, civil society member organizations as members. But let me just talk about the UN in general, you know. And here, there are ample opportunities to engage and collaborate. Let me just use one example. You know, ITU and ICANN have co hosted sessions under it. Use demystifying digital series. So these are informal gatherings in the format of brown bag lunches that aim to simplify, you know, technical concepts for a non, non technical audience, primarily diplomats. So we've hosted session both Geneva and New York, actually, on the same days. You know, one on how the internet works and internet 101, that we did in Jan, 2024 and the other one a few weeks ago, in mid February, we did one on the business plus 20 review and how to strengthen multi stakeholderism, where both the ITU Secretary General and the ICANN presidents and CEO spoke. And these were very well received by the diplomatic community. Let me thank veni here for this excellent collaboration. We had so collaborative efforts such as these, you know, really help in sending a strong joint signal to member states on promoting the core benefits of, you know, the benefits of these core values that we are discussing here.

Thanks. Thank you very much. That's very hopeful to hear that. And with that, I move to Olivier as chair of the dynamic Coalition on core internet values, what strategies do you propose to engage diverse stakeholders in discussions about the evolution of these values?

Thank you, Olivier pan speaking, so as a dynamic coalition, we have organized regular meetings at the national, regional and global IGFs, whenever we could, we have supporters. We have people that take part in the coalition and also friends that also publicize these core values outside the IGF and in other fora. And I think it's something we need to continue. And in fact, all of us, it's a bit of a of an appeal for all of us to in our own communities, speak about those values and think how important it is that we we can defend those to have the internet that we want, in addition to that I'd like to see, and this is, this might be a pipe dream, but maybe in the Longer term, some kind of a formalized way to to monitor the erosion of these values or changes to these values, a bit like some kind of a current in that value Observatory, or something of that extent, that would be able to actually be a single location where it's easy to Find out first, what these values are about, but that's that's an easy thing. It's just a website. But certainly find us where these values are somehow endangered and which ones are and in which way, because we are seeing this taking place regularly. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And with that, I turn to tripty. You heard our speakers, so how can I can strengthen collaboration with institutions such as IETF, ITU and rares to collectively uphold core internet values while strategically positioning itself in a rapidly evolving policy landscape. Over to you.

Thank you, Prairie. So ICANN has always had a very strong working relationship with these entities, IETF, ITU and RIRs. And indeed, when you look at the structure of the ICANN organizational body, we have an IETF liaison to the board, as well as have very close relationships with the RIRs and have an ASO appointment, two ASO appointees to the board. And if you look at the fundamental design principle of the internet, which is interoperability, it's essential that these organizations also inter operate with each other. And in this shifting policy landscape, as things are changing, we must continue to strengthen our relationship. And I'd like to do a shout out to venny, who from ICANN organization, who goes out of his way to build relationships with the ITU and within United Nations. And recently, Curtis, our CEO met with Doreen in Geneva and had a conversation and also the ITU has partnered with ICANN and been to the UN to do tutorials on the underpinnings of the internet and how it all works. So we must continue to strengthen this relationship. The RIRs now meet with our CEO and with the OAS every week to discuss other governance relationships related to the Ri arts. And so we have to continue to inter relate with each other and have an open dialog and cooperation. And so, if anything, I would say, we've always had a strong relationship, and we continue to build upon it.

Thank you very much, tripti, and it's so hopeful to know that internet community is uniting, and always have been united. So with that, I go to our final question, how can the internet community build public support and leverage grass root momentum to influence political decision making and safeguard core internet values, and over to you Wint. How can we communicate the importance of core internet values to the general public in a way that drives political engagement and advocacy?

So I have several suggestions, six of them in particular, and I'll try to briefly summarize. First of all, I think stories of use cases, both good use cases and bad ones, need to be shared. People will relate to stories about other people and their experiences in the online environment, and we need to both highlight the successes and emphasize the need to deal with the things that are not so successful and potentially even harmful. So highlights and low lights need to be shared. Second, we need to offer people examples of how to use the internet best. I think of YouTube training videos where you want to know how to do something, and you go and do a search on YouTube, and lo and behold, 17 people have done video showing you how to change the carburetor on your car. We need more opportunity for people to learn how to use the internet safely and securely. I almost think we should have an internet driver's license, and I think some of you have heard me talk about that. I don't think you have to actually issue a license, but you ought to have the training that typically goes along with the with what you have to do before you get a license to drive a car. The third thing is to drive higher level engagement, particularly at the IGF, and especially the periods in between the major IGF meetings, but the ones that go on intersessionally, like the dynamic coalitions. I would like to see jurists and regulators and politicians, elected leaders participate in the IGF and to engage with the vast range of people who are part of that activity. I would also strongly urge that we engage with the national and regional IGFs and also the Internet Society chapters. They can be a source of information to the general public and also to our administrations around the world. I would urge us to engage that capability. I also strongly endorse what Olivier said about measurements for how the internet is doing in various parts of the world. There are many metrics, and they are many well beyond speed and latency, we should be talking about how well it's being used, what harms are being perpetrated, whether or not it's accessible or and affordable, etc, etc. So let's do lots of measurement and share the results. And finally, something that tripty said is very dear to my heart, and that is to establish within the Internet ecosystem, institutional ecosystem, documented web of relationships among all of the parties to show that they do have a an awareness of their respective roles and a respect for each other's positions and responsibilities, but we should document that so it's clear that this is a unified community that whose objective is to make the internet useful for everyone in the ongoing decades.

Thank you very much. And with that, I go to Pritam. How can global governance institutions collaborate with grassroots movements and civil society to help maintain unified and open Internet?

Thanks again. So let me start by giving you some examples from the ITU. And at itu, we have quite a few of these opportunities. You know, you can become a formal member of the ITU, if you're an organization or a civil society entity of an international scope, technical community. Of course, we have several as members. You know, ICANN, ISOC, all the RIRs are members, and we are very grateful for this collaboration. But even without becoming a member, you can join a lot of itu activities. We have our platforms such as the business forum, AI, for good, many of our pre standardization activities. You know, where you don't need to be member, member. You could be a small private sector startup, you know, an academic, a grassroots civil society organization, you can just register and actively participate. Also, many of our projects and countries initiatives are open to collaboration with all stakeholder groups. You know, child online protection is an example. Having said all this, we took time to get here. You know, our processes have evolved to become more open over the years to get to where we are, and we're still evolving. Let me admit that. You know, in my 17 years at the ITU, I've seen a lot of change. And just as an example, you know, public access to our documents is, you know, is a is a good example. You know, it's public open access, without any any password, or pioneering remote participation for stakeholders who couldn't be there in person. Or the evolution of stakeholder participation in our internal Internet governance discussions. You know, not in all forums, of course, but quite a few now. So it's been a journey, and many UN organizations are in different stages. There are, of course, discussions that are still predominantly multilateral, especially at the UN in New York, as you may have noticed, but also in various agencies, including at the ITU, even there, we see things evolve, multi stakeholder consultation elements being introduced, even into multilateral discussions. That's why initiatives like the men we mentioned earlier. You know, joint educational sessions, inclusive membership opportunities, open forums. You know, they help in creating the shared understanding and action towards preserving you know, the internet's Foundation, principles. Thank you, pari.

Thank you. And with that, I move to Olivier. What strategies have proven most effective in mobilizing internet users to defend an open internet and hopefully be

scaled.

Thank you Pari, Olivier, capable speaking there have been, over the years, a number of very successful campaigns that some of you might not remember. Does any of you remember the Do any of you remember the SOPA and Pippa legislation and the the fight that took place then that was successful? Congress was shocked? No. So SOPA and Pippa was the protect individual Property Act and the Stop Online Piracy Act, and it was going to give the US government some pretty powerful powers to take take websites offline, etc. Anyway, the the public outcry over this got the US government to to stop this and go back, there was another one, the Save internet campaign. Do you remember the Save internet campaign that was about network neutrality in the in the US? And again, that that lasted for quite a number of years, and it was quite successful. Now, of course, these happened 10 years ago, or more than 10 years ago, and the world has changed since then. So any campaign, any public campaign, any public advocacy, would need, I think, to have four component parts. First, it needs to be focused. You can't just say, Save the internet values, because that's just such a broad, such a broad message. It's very difficult to get people to understand the whole issue. So you need to focus. You need to have a limited message that you're supporting. Secondly, sorry. Thirdly, you need to have something that is timely. The world is now. Ever since December last year, I wonder why the world is going at such an incredible speed. Things are happening so fast, and so when you're going to take action. It needs to happen pretty quickly, because otherwise, the debate and everything have moved on and then, thirdly, sorry, I can't count, can I? Fourthly, it needs to be funded. You can't have a global campaign these days without some serious funding behind it. Why? Because at the moment, there are some huge forces out there that are funded for exactly the opposite messages than the ones that we were interested in. Thank you.

Thank you. Olivier, with those interesting examples, and with that, I moved to tripty. How can the technical community, including root server operators, better engage with policy makers and public to ensure that decisions are made with a clear understanding of the internet's infrastructure.

Thank you, Pari, it is absolutely imperative we engage directly with policy makers as they legislate, because it's very dangerous for legislation to occur in the absence of understanding what they are legislating, and there could be some very serious unintended consequences. Just to cite an example, there are rumblings that BGP, which is a routing protocol, could potentially their discussions to legislate it. That would be a huge mistake, in my opinion. So I think we need to be proactive as a technical community to ensure that policy makers understand exactly how the internet works, and especially the technical underpinnings of the internet, which should continue to remain sacred, so that we can ensure technology of the transmission of bits and bytes. So we have to go out there meet with policy makers. The ICANN ecosystem is designed to bring Evan to the table. And if we don't come together in this venue here, in using our convening power, we partner with others, and we go to other entities to become governments, and we all sort of fan out and ensure that people understand how this works. And the root server operators are also doing a very good job. They actually have learn ICANN days here, where we explain to the community how the root service system works. They have a partnership work with the GAAC where they're explaining to the how it all works. And similarly, I know I have been down to the United Nations upon an invitation from ICANN many years ago to explain to them how the how the service system works. So that's just one example of what we have done, and we need to continue to do as a technical ecosystem to make sure that when policies crafted, people understand what their policies are touching and do not touch what could potentially break the internet. Thank you.

Thank you very much, and thank you all for this insightful discussion. We have set the stage and now invite our ICANN community members to share their perspectives on the challenges they face in the roles and the strategies they find most effective. We are joined by Olga Cavalli, David Lawrence, Jim Galvin and Jennifer Jon and Adil pluggon and ti Jonny will join us virtually. So each of you have two and half minutes for your intervention. So let me start with you. Adieel, flu is yours.

Thank you. Thank you, parry. I think the first part of this panel has been very enlightening, and in terms of some of the important aspects of those value that govern the internet, I'm going to take this a little bit down to the reality and what what is happening. I think one of the challenge, and for me, particularly from the technical perspective, is to be deliberate and very on decoupling the internet from its usage. I think to be successful in promoting this value for what it means to us, but not not what they mean globally. It's that we need to be consistent, trying to explain and bringing all the stakeholders to understand that the internet by itself, is the infrastructure that supports the usage and sometimes those regulation legislation tend to solve a problem at the usage level, not knowing that they can impact the infrastructure level. So we have to be very forceful and constant in decoupling those two things. That will be my first thing. The second is also to work harder with the local community to share the understanding that we have of those value we usually talk about them at the global level, but the legislator and the policy maker, direct interlocutors are local, so we need to make sure that we build The Critical Mass at the local level, by engaging with the different stakeholders at the local level to have those understanding as well, so that when they engage with their policy makers, they are able to defend the same thing that we are talking about globally. And that that aspect, for me, is very important, because when we are talking about geopolitics, sometimes there are local, local aspect to it, and if the multi stakeholder model that we test at the global level are not well translated at the local level, then there is a piece. So we need to find the right balance, both from the global and the local and the in the local and at the local level. I will stop there, and then we can help.

Thank you, Adil, for that insight, building on that perspective. Let's hear no from David.

Hello. I'm coming to you as the ITF liaison to the ICANN Board, and so I'm going to be offering an engineer's perspective. We engineers have a driving desire to make things work that the best they can work. One thing I noticed that was missing from the core internet values bullet point slide was the word cooperative. Though, in fairness, that has been mentioned a lot, and at our most fundamental biological levels, levels, humans are, of course, a very collaborative species, even though that view is often challenged now by the events of the world. My first exposure to the internet was in the 1980s when I became involved with Usenet, which was a globally distributed bulletin board system. And very early on, I was really awestruck about how this would revolutionize communications, that we were moving away from one to one or one to many models, and now had a many to many model for people to interact with each other. So if Isaac Newton had stood on the shoulders of giants, imagine what we could do. I have to slow it down a little. Unfortunately, I didn't know it only had two and a half minutes. So I will try to find the right pace, because I realized that there were a number of thoughts that I had wanted to contribute. But I will say that my early optimism for the internet may have been perhaps a bit naive and just kind of I had that youthful look forward to how the Internet was going to empower many people around the world, and that good things would come of it. And I held on to that idealistic view for many years as I volunteered my time and saw many other people volunteering their time to make the network a better network, I was really impressed with the collaboration that happened among people who just really wanted to make things with everybody else. Eventually, I moved on to the Free Software Foundation and then unit and eventually to the Internet software consortium, where we helped rewrite we, I was part of the team that rewrote the buying DNS package to make it better for everybody. And I'm really proud of the things that we accomplished there and but as the.com boom started, that it was also kind of when the it was when ICANN was formed, and soon thereafter, nominee was formed, other chapters of the internet, which I'm proud of. But that was also when it became more and more apparent that bad people were going to be using the internet for bad things. And so that really took away some of my naivety. It was challenging my optimistic view, and I had just not anticipated that that was going to happen, much less the more mundane ways in which collaboration would be hampered so but individuals still make a difference in supporting our values. I remember the low level of anxiety I felt when I moved to my first large employer, a whopping 700 people. Would I matter? But I'm happy to say that yes, I would. I got them involved in the internet engineering community, and even after I've left, they continue to be very valued members of the collaborative internet task force. If I was a little anxious about 700 people, you can imagine how I felt when I moved on to a 50,000 person company, would I still matter there? Fortunately, they have also demonstrated a commitment to being part of the broader community that helps make the Internet work. Their business is founded on it they need, you know, basically all of us working together. So I've cut out a lot, but I do want to just say I do still retain my optimism about our fear bad people will continue to do bad things. But of course, they did it before there even was an internet. And by far the internet has been a net good for our society, and I'm proud all of you for helping deliver that. So thank you Paul, for being part of the moly stakeholder process.

Thank you, David, interesting points and Jim, I'm eager to hear your comments.

Thank you, Perry, thank you very much for the invitation to speak. Here I am sax liaison to the ICANN Board, the security and stability advisory committee within ICANN. And I'm going to go into a space just as deal did when he started sort of peel away one layer and look at this from a much more practical place. I want to focus on threats that are common to the core values that we're talking about here, and since this is the at large, a lack community, I believe that these are things that we can all embrace. We can all experience easy for us to see and offer opportunities for all of us, each one of us, to have a role in trying to improve the situation that we're being faced with, things that we want to contribute to. We've heard a lot from a higher level. So two common threats normally identified as blocking security technologies and creating walled gardens. I think what's important about these two particular threats is they change the way the internet behaves, and so they are easily visible to users, although many users might not really understand that this is what's happening to them. Smaller walled gardens, if you will. Are common people do this in their homes. You you decide that there's just things you don't want your kids exposed to, and so that's easily dealt with. Enterprises do this commonly. In businesses, you want to restrict your own internal network to be just for work related purposes, and so you might take actions. But the problems get really interesting when you try to do these things at scale, and that's when the issues grow into something that we as a larger community really do need to care about. You suddenly no longer have the option of addressing those situations. When larger authorities create situations, they create policies, they make decisions that impact what the internet looks like to you now, while it's certainly true that any you know sovereign authority certainly has the right to do whatever they need to do, the thing that's unfortunate is balancing that against how that affects others outside of your domain of authority, and that becomes a critical issue. So your intentions may be valid, but the technologies that we have today and deployed in the internet, the technologies that are the core values that we're talking about here, do not readily support this notion of digital nations just isolating themselves and creating these walled gardens. And I think that's important to call out. It creates a different user experience. We as users could be in different places in the world. It impacts the rest of the world. They don't see the internet the same way that you do. These are the kinds of things that are breaching our core values that we're trying to achieve, I would say what we need, in general, is greater discussion, greater collaboration, greater application of the multi stakeholder model between those who ensure the Internet continues to respect the core values that we have, and those who have a problem to solve certainly don't want to deny the rights of sovereign authorities to solve the problem that they believe that they have. But I think we need greater intensity in working together to find a better balance, so that we can all get what we want, and we can all take some responsibility in that and in this user community that we're here, you should think in your own place, in your own home, in your own places of business, in your own countries. How can you work with the thorough the authorities that are around you and consider how best to address these problems? Thanks. Thank

you Jim for that really insightful comments. We now turn to Olga to hear her comments, and perhaps we better understand from the CCNs perspective, Olga, over to

you. Thank you pan crypto. Thank you Haq for inviting me to this very, very interesting exchange of ideas. Having heard what colleagues have said, I will be a little bit disruptive. Will profit from the very good translation services. So speaking, my mother tongue, which is Spanish, you

okay, they're all

set. Fantastic. Gracias. Muchas gracias. Un DESA fi AB lado yo. ICANN, siempre Halo en English, as si que tengo que pensar que SAS un po comas quiero resultar al mus comentarios que eso trip the sobre la importancia del dialogo entre las distintas organizationes que coordinan, itu IETF. Recuerdo es algo que vino a mi memoria recientemente en este momento alguna, en Satra donde yo, personalmente de sea de ICANN se Sentara Adria Logar con el secretario General De itu. Era momentos donde habi hacerta Tension entre la distantas organizaciones y creo que nada mejor para este ecosistema y para preservar los valores centrales o mas importante de internet que tener un dia lo abierto y rubido Ente la distintas organizationes y creo que Vien tambien, expresso algo interessante de tener documentada esta, esta distinta, este dia, lo y me qui no pensando tanto de la perspectiva del si, si, si, en eso donde participos ahora como non com appointee, as I como mi roll, como sente yo a parte de mi trabajo, como ingeniera en temas de public policy relacionadas con technology. Soy docent universitarias muchos San Jose quiero pensan el a comunidad en general como puede ayudar a preserver los valores centrales de internet, es muy importante que la comunidad en general y cada uno de nosotros en distintos stakeholders donde participamos, entendamos los elementos y las instituciones que hacen al funcionamiento de internet Para muchas gente, internete su fluido que sucede cuando uno conecto una computadora a UNCA outlet, es una cosa dada. Es una cosa simple que simplemente se paga por eje y sucede. No es tan asi. Hay muchas organizaciones sin volocradas en su funcionamiento. So tengo una, una frase para me Sal Lu, no es cuando me pero como se Cordina internet is yo. Siempre les digo que si lo se amado el presidente dun bais y la pregunta qui en es el Duan yo de internet o el se o de internet o la Duane de internet ho la Presidente internet no Abria manera de responder esas Mesa pregunta, Porque no hay una coordination global Don ecosistema de organizations. Comprenderlo es muy importante ustedes median porque Esme pregunto, porque lo gobierno no participant tanto en el IGF, en el Internet Governance Forum para un gobierno, imaginar en un gobierno de pronto, internet se cord en ese Pais a pasado, ya en varios pues, de mi regione en otra regone, tambien, que pasaria no puede funcionar en gobierno. Se pueden con Cora in Puerto, no funciones, la soniversidades, porque lo gobierno no es tan presentes mucho man presentes en forma presencial, ob virtual, en paces donde se definen la Regla de internet. No hay que ser technical, simplemente que entender la conceptualization de el funcionamiento en que lugar uno de participar, no que SAS, no, no todo podemos ser I ETF, porque muy technical in Governance Forum o Ven, I can secret, okay, I'm trying importante de ICANN, por ejemplo, en crear el apacio de fellowships in tener reduction, yes, pero the corona so que la Redux Jones, si Asian elemento di po nibla En agrionese, ICANN, Jon PSE and I can come into the window. May preguntaba interesaven, tener la si ha la Vien English que muchas gente no entonces es importante tambien, quiero Express mento por processo de next gen. Creo que muy bueno yo, personalmente, y mi colega Adrien. This is personas de America, Latin there in bogs is preserver loss, those core instant values. No Mr. En Espanol. The cada uno de nuestro rollest participar activamente. Creo que te ser Mesa que no tenemos que llevar. No es algo tan technical. Podemos intender In tengo super importante para que todos participos y podoma Portales ser los.

Thank you very much. And I turn to Jennifer, what are your thoughts? Jennifer,

thank you, Harry. My name is Jennifer Chung. I am a counselor from the registries, but I am not speaking on behalf of the council nor the registry stakeholder group. My first thought is, I wished my translator machine actually worked and I could hear Olga's great points. I think that is the realities of trying to rely on technology work. We hope it does work. I guess the first thing I want to take just a half step back we talk about the multi stakeholder model here, because we are participating. But the multi stakeholder model is not a monolith. There is no one definitive way to do things. Of course, at the net, mon dia plus 10, there has been guidelines that look at measuring different types of multi stakeholder processes and models. But it's not a monolith. We need to remember that sometimes we sit here and we forget different flavors. We practice the ICANN flavor here. And coordination is inbuilt in the DNA of the of the internet. I think we heard from Vincent, from all the speakers, that the the RRS and the IETF also practice their ways of consensus building, in their in their in their policy development to all of this core internet values, and also in the governance of the critical internet infrastructure. I really want to focus more on the second question. Really it's about how can the internet community, internet governance community, strategize and collaborate to uphold these values in the face of this political dynamic. It's no secret that's the geopolitical tensions are increasing, especially after certain events last year, this year, and we'll be more intense as we go along. One thing that's happening, you know, you know, definitely involving the ICANN community is there was a plus 20 review and process, there's potential for the multi stakeholder model to be used as the mitigation, as a tactical strategy paired with a development agenda to actually mitigate and address the multilateral political jockeying that you can see happening at very high levels, mid levels, and also, you know, through the corridors too, and it's a very good, pragmatic approach. I think we heard from ITU and as well as QPI, finding a sweet spot. What do I mean by that? Find a sense of a multi stakeholder process or consultation or model, or some form of input in a multilateral framework. I don't answer for how we do that. It is a big balancing act. I think both ITU and, of course, within IGF as well, there is these Oasis, multi stakeholder discussions that really can inform policy making. Really can inform those who make the policy decisions that these are the things that we really care about abroad, and also something that's really important as well strategically, not only having formal touch points, but also semi formal, informal things like what itu has also mentioned brown bag lunches that actually inform different delegates who go into these negotiations, who go into these that impact how the Internet to be governed day to day business for all operators and here as well, to for them to be informed in your negotiation, the red lines don't break the internet. This is how we do business. This is how we rely on this underpinning technology to be able to do our work here. And then finally, of course, more coordination, more discussion and dialog. I am, I am a registry operator. We are part of, you know, the technical operators who manage a critical function, you know, the DNS system as well. But not only having dialog within this small slice of technical community, we're just a part of it, but also having different combinations across stakeholder groups, talking to civil society, talking to private sector, and, of course, overarching talking to everything. I think if we are able to spread the information to not talk in unison, but talk in harmony. I think that's really important. We're not all saying exactly the same words, but having a multitude of voices that actually uphold how we look at the core internet values is really important. And finally, I want to leave, well, three points I want really to offer from the technical community, my part of the technical community, we need to get better at explaining our technical and political and sorry, operational and policy processes and impacts in plain language, for first, for everyone to understand what we do, and then secondly, to translate this into language and one pagers for policy makers, for delegates going into these negotiations to be able to pick up and use directly. I think this is really important. The second thing is, I think Vin already mentioned it is to highlight the use cases that illustrate impacts to the internet infrastructure, technical standards and operations. And then finally, continuous engagement with policy makers and delegates for effective communication and mutual capacity building for us, giving them our technical expertise, and for them, giving us the understanding and nuance of how they need to go into these political negotiations.

Thank you very much. Jennifer, I think we had a very interesting discussion and insightful comments from everyone. So with that, now, I would like to thank everyone and open the floor for questions. I will take one question from the floor and one for virtually. There is one minute limit for questions, so anybody has a question

or comment over to you. Alfie,

thank you. Ari, speaking and very much. And enjoyed listening to all. One of the things that I felt was missing, and perhaps it was there and I just didn't notice it is the essential bottom up of multi stakeholder models. I've sort of spent many decades wandering among the models and and seen how many different varieties there are. These varieties grow from that bottom up nature where different groups of people sort of democratically find their own, their own model, and I think that's important, especially as we want this model to increase, because different people get to different level, different groups get to different levels of the model, different maturities of the model, But yet proceed down that road, one thing I heard scared me, and that was the notion that ICANN should have some way of doing its regulatory function that was more of a regulatory power, because that could only come from above by using contracts, and Perhaps we can find other clever mechanisms by using mechanisms that do the regulatory function coming from the bottom up, as opposed to from the top down, is a direction I think we need to maintain. Thanks. Sorry if I went longer than a minute.

Thank you very much for that interesting comment, and

here you have missed. Tijani. Benjamin, yes from the speaker,

so yes, so floor is yours. Tijani,

thank you so much. Speaking. We are speaking about the intellectual value, but before we speak about that, we need first to know that internet exists, and internet wouldn't exist if it's not unique. The unique aspect of the internet is very important, so we have to always have it in our mind as one of the most important condition for the internet. Now that the internet is single, it is one Internet, and it is and it exists. It should be natural. This is one of the values that several people don't want to hear internet should be the same. Should should be should serve all people from the on this world, whatever their color, that their gender, their their nationality, their country, etc. So this is a very important value that I think some people don't want to hear about it should be inclusive, inclusive, and he needs users. Means that anyone that understand and use any language with any script can access internet. And this is solved by Ibn fortunately, we still have some small problems with the universal acceptance, but with the news of 12, we are going to have a real universal acceptance in the future, so inclusive in its users, but also inclusive in its operation. It is not normal that the DNS industry is concentrated in the Global North. ICANN did a lot of efforts in the 2012 round with an applicant support program, and they put money to help and to support up to 14 applicants, but unfortunately, we didn't support any. And this is another issue for this round, I can put more money and we are able to support between 40 and 45 applicants. The problem is that it is not designed for underserved regions and underserved communities. Perhaps we will have 40 or 45 support applicants, and I am afraid they will be most of them, or all of them from the Global North. Also ICANN should be resistant to abuse. And you know that the NS abuse today is a real issue for the internet. There is a lot of people and a lot of parties voting on this issue. And I can is doing their part. There is also PR, who is who created an executes and other private companies are working on the the issue for the DNS abuse is the notification, because I don't think that restricts and registers will pay. Will we spend time to verify if the notification is relevant, is right, is false, they cannot do that. So we need a certain trust and the notification, and there was this notion of trusted notifiers that was used at certain time. But the last time I discussed with some of those who are working on this issue, he told me that he prefer to speak about trusted verifiers than notifiers. So those are the values that perhaps not a lot of people speak about now, I go to the challenges we are facing. And of course, there are the technical challenges, the new technique, technical such as the IPB six, that will make the Internet of Things work, because when, when you have an almost an infinity of addresses, you can, you can make the entire things working and this, and any, in this case, anything, will have a sensor. Sensors will have actuators, so that you can monitor and and command those things. And these devices can be a spy or in your pocket, in your car, in your in your bathroom, etc. So this is an issue. Why? Because it is a problem of data that out loads users of the of the things their data are in risk, also the another new technology is the artificial intelligence. And the active shared intelligence is about algorithm and data also, again, data is the issue. So I think that in the future, working on the protection of the users data will be very also. There is the blockchain domain name that is will be not a problem, but will be an issue for I spoke with Jon green here about this, and he told me that he is in conversation with the people who are developing this technology, and he's open to find the collaboration, discussion, etc, to find the right solution for this issue.

The other challenge the time is up, actually, Johnny, I appreciate if you wrap it up. Okay.

Okay, so the geopolitical so you know that when we speak about geopolitical issues, normally we speak about the governments who are attempting to to go to the multi state, the multilateral governance model. I will not speak about that. Now, the priority is the the word order, which changing now, and you know that we are going toward more SoVi, more nationalism, etc, which is against the flow, flow of of information, etc. So I will stop here. Thank

you very much, and floor is yours. Alhamdra for the questions online. Thank you.

I would briefly say that there's been mostly support for what has been said, for example, by Vint in the discussion online, a call of support for the oasis of multi stakeholder discussion venues and a consistent message of, don't break the internet, and support for the idea of the observatory or the core internet values. I will reserve a minute to mention that when we started a coalition for core internet values, the main concern was people trying to fix the internet, as was mentioned by Jim Bay, things that actually are usage and not the internet infrastructure itself. And destroying the internet is supposed to be a list, which may be a bit you know, you may be sharpening your definitions of what you shouldn't break because you would lose the internet. And I'll come back after the next participations. I'm not recording Bruno Santos participation because she has her hand up, so I guess she'll deliver it herself. In the interest of time, we will be, I'll be contributing with Bay to making the interventions very, very brief and allow for please more, a bit more exchange, instead of just adding ideas forward to please.

Thanks. Thanks so much, everyone. I just maybe highlight one of the points that I typed in the chat. This is a very valuable conversation, and I do agree with the point raised by Adrien. One of the most meaningful aspects of this entire conversation is is the bottom up aspect right? And then it's about how stakeholders have been collaborating in order to build the policies and to reach consensus and so on. But at the same time, I feel a little bit strange that I'm watching this conversation. I don't have choices of like advocates or non commercial folks in the community, and it would be really important, especially in times like that, because we cannot afford for the same place the GDC process where the technical community was completely disregarded, to happen now again. So I mean, as part of the non commercial group of this community, it will be continued this debate with more of our folks also joining the conversation, as we have also been advocating for many things across the board, from the UN and also, thanks a lot. Alejandro,

thank you. No, we go to Sebastian.

Merci beaucoup. Sebastian.

Repower, Mercy. The fort and Teresa mercy. Or gather our schedule pass see on wi internet for compounds,

please.

Sorry. Alessandro

Sebastian, please continue. I think there was a problem with technique, technology, please.

Okay, my, my, this is my point. Alessandro, even if you don't like that,

I thought, I thought it

was something. Disc, ski this

mercy.

Thank you, Sebastian. And now back to Alejandro for questions

online, who have also commenting on in the chat, but has raised her hands.

Thank you Alejandro, thank you Barry. So I just wanted to reiterate what I said in chat. The GNSS Council has an informal Internet governance group that we are, it's very informal, and which we are just trying to create communication channels between communities at ICANN to discuss what's going on in Internet governance, and which is plus 20. And just wanted to point that out, and we would be glad to meet with you and any group that is working on internal governance.

Thank you very much.

Any other questions, otherwise, we go to Alejandra. Thank

you. I would like to make a brief intervention, touching on several of the points that have been made, ICANN has always one response, to stay lean and leaner, avoid mission creep, and at the same time, stay aware of all The environmental in the technical community, in the multilateral space, and now coming things, things that are upcoming, like sovereignty, I think that we should be much more aware that what we have been doing over Now 25 years and more, 27 minutes, first word is combination of national and global or international. A recent paper that calls to move by Kash Kapoor, the calls to move from focusing on digital sovereignty for especially for developers and more to digital agency, which doesn't sacrifice sovereignty, but understands interconnectedness and allow for your country to become actively essential in the in the internet and artificial intelligence and other innovative spaces, as I already mentioned, core values was predicated continues to be valuable, to guard against those improvements proposed as such, they mentioned, in the in the in the session, people who try to improve things and will actually break the internet and make it not available to everybody. I think that processes like the GDC are actually a threat to these core values, and Bruna has spelled it very clearly by not paying enough attention, not giving real participation, especially technical community, but also mostly a token participation to civil society. These processes and the IG U itself continue to teeter on the edge. I think these are the my my key takeaways, plus many that will need. Some people are in the in the room and asking for asking to speak. I think we have time at least Nenad orlis, if you allow Bay and naves to go to the table and raise the microphone, Jennifer is mentioning that you can raise your hand and go to the master

the physical session. Thank you,

Robert and see MC to be the positive always could be of another split in the private entry. And that was my first point, because we talk about inclusion, acceptance. Some of the people here had the opportunity to speak in their native language, but I did not, and they cannot so so much about universal acceptance and use of your own language. Second, you have put this in front. I have one question in a minute to do it, so I'll try to use it. But I have questions first, are you all aware looking from the side, this all looks like a discussion of people who are just mostly interested in keeping their own power of decision making and skipping the status quo in the decision making into Internet, without the lack of with the lack of worry for the end user the internet. And if Vint is still present, I would like to ask him, as a father, one of the fathers of the internet have did envision the internet as a place where there is no ownership, because we sell here, we sell we say, here, we sell domains. We do not release it as you have no privacy. You have limit to the information you can say or exchange, even here at the this you see another point made, so please take care a bit more about the end users of the internet and the core values that should apply to them, not just about the internet governance and who governs. Thank you. You

Joly speaking, thank you, Nana, for these, for these points. I think part of the in fact, the main reason why we're actually discussing these things is to serve the end user out there. And there's one thing that a lot of people keep on forgetting, there were many other networks in the world before, but there's only one internet. And the reason why there is only one internet is because of the people that make up the internet. It is the fact that there will be people on there that brought service providers that provided services for these people, and the fact that the people use the internet for whatever they wanted, or thanks to the core internet values that the internet had, there were private networks. There were all sorts of other networks before with more restrictions with internet prevailed because of the end users. So thank you for reminding us that this should really take care of the end users and keep them at the CORE Center, because that, I think it's something we always have to remind ourselves.

Thank you very much. We are at the top of the hour. So let's remember Internet governance is not just about policies, it's about the values we choose to uphold. And on that note, thank you to our panelists, community members, social stuff, and all of you for being part of the conversation. Let's keep it going. Thank you.

A word of recognition to you Bay for leading the session

recording. stopped.