Internet Governance Task Force of Japan


■ IGTF's Position Paper at Tunis PrepCom

IGTF has prepared a Position Paper comiling mostly from the previous statement we published in August in response to WGIG report. We think existing ICANN framework is largely working fine and there is no need for radical change. We also consider that proposed Forum may not be needed and if it is ever established, its mission, composition, cost-benefit should be carefully considered. WSIS has resumed its PrepCom3 here in Tunis and trying to reach consensus before the Summit will meet on Nov 16. They have less than 40 hours to conclude.

Izumi Aizu

■ IGTF Comment to WGIG Report

IGTF sent its comments to the WGIG Report released in July, to the WSIS Secretariat. It was sent trough GLOCOM, WSIS accredited organization, and now published from official WSIS website, too.

■ IGTF sent its Response to WGIG Questionnaire

In preparing its final report, WGIG issued a questionnaire in May 2005, comprising the following four issues and solicited responses openly. This questionnaire asks about
1) The need for a new “Forum” to deal with Internet Governance issues
2) The future status of ICANN
3) The future status of other existing organizations dealing with Internet Governance issues
4) Coordination on National process and International framework on Internet Governance

IGTF made its comment and response and submitted it to the WGIG secretariat on June 11. In its response, IGTF made clear that such a new forum is not necessary because the conventional approach of the Internet community to new and emerging issues has worked so far.

■ IGTF submits its comment

IGTF prepared its comment on the Papers prepared by WGIG, focusing on the "Cluster 1b" papers dealing with IP Numbers, Domain Name, and Root Server, and submitted it to the WGIG Secretariat.

IGTF also participated the WGIG meeting held in Geneva on April 18 and made oral contribution quoting this comment paper.

■ IGTF-J submitted its comments to WGIG

As a part of its ongoing activities to participate global collaborative work with the Working Group on the Internet Governance (WGIG) of WSIS, IGTF-J (Internet Governance Task Force of Japan) submitted its comments to WGIG secretariat.

Comments submitted by IGTF-J [PDF]

This is the response to the Issue Papers drafted and published by the members of WGIG which include some 21 subjects.

Since the time given was very limited, IGTF chose three most important issues, namely
Administration of Internet Names and IP Addresses
Administration of the Root Server system
Multilingualization of Internet Naming System

The WGIG meeting will be held Feb 14 to 18 in Geneva, of which morning of Feb 14 and al day on Feb 15 and 16 will be open to public. Webcast will be provided for the open sessions.
Please see for more details of the webcast.

■ IGTF comment on new IPv6 allocation proposal at WGIG

Internet Governance Task Force of Japan (IGTF-J) made contribution to the first WGIG meeting on Nov 24 in Geneva. IGTF specifically focused on the new draft proposal circulated from Mr. Zhao of ITU to allocate a portion of IPv6 Address spaces to ITU and then pass that to nation states for them to manage.

(full text)
■ Government of Japan submited its contribution (Sep 16)

Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication (MIC) of Japan submitted its contribution to the WGIG preparatory meeting. It is now archived at the official WGIG website.

(full text)
■ IGTF-J submits Contribution to WGIG meeting

Sep 13, 2004
Internet Governance Task Force of Japan

“Private sector-led management is the key for Internet success”

IGTF-J (Internet Governance Task Force of Japan) submits its contribution to the
UN working Group on Internet Governance

Internet Governance Task Force of Japan (IGTF-J) today submitted its contribution on WGIG’s scope, composition and working methods.

In its contribution, IGTF-J is calling for the following:

- The WGIG should carry out an objective study of the issues relevant to the Internet
Governance that require worldwide examination.
- The WGIG should not be captured by political biases.
- The structure of WGIG should ensure that the opinions of all stakeholders are fully reflected.
- The WGIG’s processes should be open and transparent
- Measures should be taken to ensure that non-native speakers of English can participate

(full text)
■ Comments welcome!

Internet Governance Task Force of Japan (IGTF-J) has prepared its draft contribution to the Consultation Meeting in Geneva to be held on September 20-21.

We have posted it here and would like to welcome your comments that will be reflected to the final version and then submitted to WGIG secretariat by Sep 13. A mailing list for discussion will be starting shortly.

For your comments, please send them to
We will finalize our comment by Sep 11, but the earlier the better.

The Japanese version of our draft is placed here for your reference.

■ Internet Governance Task Force launched on Aug 20, 2004

Internet Governance Task Force of Japan (IGTF-J) was officially launched on Aug 20, 2004 to participate in the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) of the United Nations’ World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) and to maintain and promote private-sector led framework of the Internet management.

Started at 10:30 Aug 20 at the Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC), the inaugurating General Meeting was held and IGTF became into existence formally. There were some 20 attendees including Prof Shumpei Kumon of Tama University, Toru Takahashi, Vice President, Internet Association Japan, Kouki Higashida, President, Japan Registry Services, Co., Ltd., Toshiaki Tateishi, Executive Director, Japan Internet Providers Association and other representatives of the members of IGTF.
Prof. Kumon reported the background and the process that led to the establishment of the IGTF, and then the members examined and adopted the proposals on Membership, Bylaws, Officers, Business Plan and Budget.
IGTF then held its first Steering Committee meeting and decided to set-up a working group on Internet resources and also discussed and agreed with the activity plan.

(full text)