[ALAC] [APAC-ALS] [EURO-ALS] ACTION ITEM: Consultation on makeup of ICANNRegions underway

[Rajnesh D. Singh]

If I were asked to choose between 1) and 2), it would be 2).

It would be important, IMO, to be positioned geographically. Whilst 
being a small island
state anywhere in the world generally has some common issues and 
challenges with another
small island state elsewhere in the world, there are also differences in 
language (obvious),
culture and customs which can impact on how priority issues are 
identified and classified.
The 22 Island States and Territories of the Pacific Islands would 
identify more with each other
and their larger neighbours, than say the Caribbean or Indian Ocean States.

On the earlier comment about some island states in the Pacific are EU 
rather than AP, this is
probably more a political issue as they are states or territories under 
the control of France,
much as .AS and .GM are US territories. This is probably a whole new 
debate which is likely
not for this list.


Regards,
Rajnesh Singh
www.picisoc.org




Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
> I'm wondering if the comments Carlton Samuels made recently are 
> relevant here with respect to all Small Island States.
>
> Would there be value in discussing whether or not all small island 
> states might be either:
>
> 1) Their own region - irrespective of their physical location;
> 2) In a region of their own, but also associated with the region they 
> are geographically in.
>
> On 08/02/07, * Franck Martin* <franck.martin at gmail.com 
> <mailto:franck.martin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     The problem with the Asia/Pacific grouping is that the Pacific
>     Islands receive so little funds that most of the things that can
>     be done is an assessment study, and no more funds for
>     implementation...
>
>     Also the issues are quite different from the Asia and Pacific
>     Islands.
>
>     Finally, NC and PF fell more linked to FR than to the other
>     Pacific Islands. This is also true for PW, GM, AS which are more
>     linked to US.
>
>     Complex scenario....
>
>     On 2/8/07, *Roberto Gaetano* <roberto at icann.org
>     <mailto:roberto at icann.org>> wrote:
>
>         I think that also Frank, from the Pacific Islands, might have
>         something to
>         add to this (re: the fact that some islands are AP, some EU).
>
>         RG
>
>
>
>         > -----Original Message-----
>         > From: euro-als-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>         <mailto:euro-als-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>         > [mailto:euro-als-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>         <mailto:euro-als-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>] On Behalf
>         > Of Wendy Seltzer
>         > Sent: 07 February 2007 14:57
>         > To: nashton at spamcop.net <mailto:nashton at spamcop.net>;
>         alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>         > Subject: Re: [EURO-ALS] [ALAC] ACTION ITEM: Consultation on
>         > makeup of ICANNRegions underway
>         >
>         > Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
>         > > Just a reminder, there is an open consultation on the
>         Geographic
>         > > Regions of ICANN, and whether the regions should be changed.
>         > >
>         > > The At-Large community's views would be welcomed - this
>         point was
>         > > actually reinforced to me today by Paul Twomey amongst others.
>         > >
>         > > Might I suggest at least two points which could be
>         > communicated, these
>         > > two points being ones I have heard mentioned by others, and
>         > not being
>         > > personal observations?
>         > >
>         > > 1) Some member-states of the European Union are located in
>         regions
>         > > outside of Europe, which ought to be changed. In fact,
>         candidate
>         > > states of the EU might also be better situated within the
>         European
>         > > region than in others (Turkey comes to mind as an obvious
>         > example of
>         > > this);
>         > > 2) The Asia-Pacific region is currently enormous. I have
>         > heard it said
>         > > in particular that some representatives of Middle-Eastern
>         groups
>         > > believe it ought to be a region of it's own, not in the
>         APAC region.
>         >
>         > I encouraged our Puerto Rican ALS applicants to comment
>         > directly, but we should further recall that at least some of
>         > them feel they'd be better served by participating in the LAC
>         region.
>         >
>         > --Wendy
>         > bracing for the set of bounces from regional lists...
>         > >
>         > > For the full text of the consultation announcement, please
>         visit
>         > >
>         http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-rev-28nov06.htm.
>
-- 

Kind regards,

Rajnesh D. Singh

COO, PATARA  www.patarapacific.com
Chairman, Pacific Islands Chapter, Internet Society  www.picisoc.org
President, IPv6 Forum Pacific Islands  www.ipv6forumpacific.org
Director, Pacific Internet Technology Centre  www.pacificit.org

310 Princes Road   Tamavua   Suva   Fiji
Tel: +679 332 0606    Fax: +679 332 0800

Read my ramblings at http://singh-a-blog.blogspot.com/