Subject: Re: [iucg] [Ianaplan] Public Consultation and Webinars Announced: "CWG On Naming Related Functions Public Consultation on Draft Transition Proposal"

From: Jefsey <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 14:21:42 +0100

John,
Thank you for this.
Nature hates vacuums. Three vacuums are being created.

1. coordination between technologies - TCP/IP and non-TCP/IP
2. removal of NTIA sovereign sponsoring of the unique authoritative root lie.
3. RFC 6852 needed referent about the economic requirements for technologies.

ICANN wants to fill them with the WEF sponsoring for the economic issues.
jfc

At 02:51 02/12/2014, John Curran wrote:
>IETF IANAplan folks -
>
>I note that the CWG On Naming Related Functions has called for 
>"Public Consultation on
>on Draft Transition Proposalâ€ and this contains several questions 
>that may be relevant to
>the IETF community, including -
>
>>"- Who should have standing with the independent Appeals Panel? 
>>(section 3.4.3.2 of this document) – The CWG recommends that all 
>>decisions and actions (including deliberate inaction) of the IANA 
>>Functions Operator that affect the Root Zone or Root Zone WHOIS 
>>database be subject to an independent and binding appeals panel. 
>>The Appeals Mechanism should also cover any policy implementation 
>>actions that affect the execution of changes to the Root Zone File 
>>or Root Zone WHOIS and how relevant policies are applied. Where 
>>disputes arise as to the implementation of "IANArelated policies.â€
>
>This process could end up being proposed the governing alternative 
>to RFC 2860 MOU
>dispute resolution process in circumstances where the application of 
>"IANArelated policies"
>from the IETF, e.g. DNS reserved entries, intersect gTLD policy in 
>an contested manner.
>
>>"- Key contracting provisions – the end of Section 3 refers the 
>>reader to Annex 5, which presents key provisions which would be 
>>required to be in the first contract between ICANN and the new 
>>contacting entity "Contract Co.". A number of these provisions come 
>>from the current NTIA IANA Functions Contract and are proposed to 
>>be retained in the new contract, either in original or modified 
>>form. Several of these provisions include options or questions on 
>>which the CWG would also appreciate receiving input.…â€œ
>
>Note that these CWG proposed contracting arrangements may include 
>items outside of the
>scope of naming which would require coordination to establish.  As 
>an example, per the CWG
>Draft proposal -  "Regarding function 9, the Customer Service 
>Complaint Resolution Process (CSCRP), and the implementation of 
>performance modifications referred to in function 11, the CWG 
>anticipates that the NRO/ASO and IETF may also have proposals in 
>these areas, and the CWG will exchange information, collaborate and 
>develop joint proposals with them on these issues as appropriate.â€
>
>>"Input on a specific (ICANN) alternative solution
>>The CWG is also seeking input on a specific alternative option, 
>>which has been raised within the CWG, which envisages all NTIA 
>>responsibilities being transferred to ICANN. This option would 
>>require an increase in ICANN accountability to its constituent 
>>communities and require the adoption of binding arbitration 
>>mechanisms (such recommendations may be beyond the scope of the CWG 
>>and probably rest with the CCWG on ICANN Accountability or other 
>>groups). Note that this integrated option would impact the future 
>>ease or ability to tender for another IANAFunctions Operator (other 
>>than ICANN). However, to ensure there has been a proper 
>>consideration of this option, the CWG, would appreciate input from 
>>the community regarding support, or not, for this concept. "
>
>Attached is the announcement on the CWG on Naming Related Functions 
>Public Consultation
>on the Draft Transition Proposal, including Webinar arrangements 
>that they have provided for
>in the next 3 days to receive feedback.
>
>FYI,
>/John
>
>Disclaimer:  my views alone.
>
>
>Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>From: Grace Abuhamad 
>><<mailto:[email-masked]>[email-masked]>
>>To: "<mailto:[email-masked]>[email-masked]" 
>><<mailto:[email-masked]>[email-masked]>
>>Date: December 2, 2014 at 5:07:35 AM GMT+4
>>Subject: [ianatransition] Webinars Announced: CWG On Naming Related 
>>Functions Public Consultation on Draft Transition Proposal
>>
>>To view the original post, please see: 
>><https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2014-12-01-en>https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2014-12-01-en
>>
>>
>>
>>WEBINAR: Cross Community Working Group (CWG) On Naming Related 
>>Functions Public Consultation on Draft Transition Proposal
>>
>>
>>
>>Following the request of the National Telecommunications and 
>>Information Administration (NTIA) forICANN to "convene a 
>>multistakeholder process to develop a plan to transition the U.S. 
>>government stewardship role" with regard to the IANA Functions and 
>>related root zone management, a Cross Community Working Group (CWG) 
>>was tasked with developing a consolidated transition proposal for 
>>the elements of the IANA Functions relating to the Domain Name 
>>System (DNS). The CWG has now published its draft transition 
>>proposal for 
>><https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-naming-transition-2014-12-01-en>public 
>>comment. Comments can be submitted until 22 December at 23:59 UTC.
>>
>>In order to brief the community on the contents on this draft 
>>transition proposal and encourage community feedback, the CWG will 
>>be organizing three identical webinars at different times to 
>>facilitate participation across time zones. The webinars will take place on:
>>    * 3 December from 7:00 – 8:30 UTC (time zone converter 
>> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+Webinar&iso=20141203T07&p1=1440&ah=1&am=30>here) 
>>
>>    * 4 December from 12:30 – 14:00 UTC (time zone converter 
>> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+Webinar&iso=20141204T1230&p1=1440&ah=1&am=30>here) 
>>
>>    * 4 December from 16:00 – 17:30 UTC (time zone converter 
>> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+Webinar&iso=20141204T16&p1=1440&ah=1&am=30>here) 
>>
>>
>>----------
>>Webinar Details & How to Attend
>>
>>The webinars will be run in an 
>><https://icann.adobeconnect.com/cwgiana/>Adobe Connect room. If you 
>>are interested in attending the webinar and would like to receive 
>>dial-in details, please send an email to 
>><mailto:[email-masked]>[email-masked] and 
>>indicate which day / time you would like to attend the webinar. 
>>Please note that the webinar will be conducted in English and will 
>>be recorded and transcribed. Subsequently the transcripts will be 
>>translated in the 5 UN languages and posted on the CWG Wiki 
>><https://community.icann.org/x/SIEHAw>here.
>>
>>----------
>>The Draft Transition Proposal
>>
>>The CWG structured its draft transition proposal based on the IANA 
>>Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) Request for 
>>Proposals. These are:
>>>1 Description of Community's Use of IANA Functions
>>>2A Existing, Pre-Transition Arrangements – Policy Sources
>>>2B Existing, Pre-Transition Arrangements – Oversight and Accountability
>>>3 Proposed Post-Transition Oversight and Accountability Arrangements
>>>4 Transition Implications
>>>5 NTIA Requirements
>>>6 Community Process
>>
>>Sections 1, 2A and 2B describe the current situation.
>>
>>Section 3, which is the heart of the transition proposal, is still 
>>a work in progress as not all details have been ironed out as of 
>>the publication of this consultation. Although lacking some 
>>details, the information provided in this section should be 
>>sufficiently detailed to allow the communities to comment on all 
>>key components. In summary, section 3 proposes the creation of 4 
>>new entities to replace the current NTIAarrangements. These are:
>>    * Contract Co. – This primary function of this entity (likely a 
>> non-profit corporation) is to be signatory to the contract with 
>> the IANA Functions Operator. This entity should be lightweight and 
>> have little or no staff.
>>    * Multistakeholder Review Team (MRT) – The MRT would be a 
>> multi-stakeholder body with formally selected representatives from 
>> all of the relevant communities (exact composition TBD). The 
>> operation of the MRT would be based on the concept of maximum 
>> public transparency. The responsibilities of the MRT will include:
>>        * Developing the detailed contract terms for the agreement 
>> between Contract Co. and theIANA Functions Operator, based on the 
>> key contract terms proposed as part of this proposal and set forth as Annex 3
>>        * Making key decisions for Contract Co. (e.g., whether or 
>> not to enter into a rebidding (RFP) process for the operation of 
>> the IANA Naming Functions)
>>        * Conducting the IANA Functions Operator Budget Review
>>        * Addressing any escalation issues raised by the Customer 
>> Standing Committee (CSC) including the possibility of engaging in enforcement
>>        * Performing certain elements of administration (including 
>> periodic performance reviews) currently set forth in the IANA 
>> Functions Contract and currently being carried out by theNTIA
>>        * Managing a re-contracting or rebidding (RFP) process for 
>> the operation of the IANAFunctions, both as an enforcement option 
>> and as part of a regular rebidding procedure
>>    The CWG is in the process of discussing whether there is an 
>> additional enforcement role for the MRT related to policy 
>> implementation by the IANA Functions Operator; specifically, 
>> whether the MRT should be able to commence a proceeding before the 
>> Independent Appeals Panel.
>>    * Customer Standing Committee (CSC) – While the exact 
>> composition is still to be determined, the CSC would primarily be 
>> made up of a number of representatives of registry operators, 
>> including ccTLD and gTLD registries. Input from the CSC would feed 
>> into and inform the work of the MRT. It is possible that the CSC 
>> would also include additional individuals with relevant expertise 
>> and/or liaisons (or representatives) from other SO/ACs. The CSC would:
>>        * Work with the MRT to establish Service Levels and 
>> Performance Indicators for the performance of the IANA Naming Functions
>>        * Receive reports from the IANA Functions Operator 
>> including regular performance reports.
>>        * Review these reports against established service levels 
>> and escalate any significant issues to the MRT
>>    * Independent Appeals Panel (IAP) – The CWG recommends that all 
>> IANA actions which affect the Root Zone or Root Zone WHOIS 
>> database be subject to an independent and binding appeals panel. 
>> The Appeals Mechanism should also cover any policy implementation 
>> actions that affect the execution of changes to the Root Zone File 
>> or Root Zone WHOIS and how relevant policies are applied. This 
>> need not be a permanent body, but rather could be handled the same 
>> way as commercial disputes are often resolved, through the use of 
>> a binding arbitration process using an independent arbitration 
>> organization (e.g., ICDR, ICC, AAA) or a standing list of 
>> qualified people under rules promulgated by such an organization.
>>
>>Sections 4, 5 and 6 are currently in development and are directly 
>>dependent on the final choices that will be made for section 3.
>>
>>For further details, you are encouraged the review the draft 
>>transition proposal in its entirety, 
>>available<https://community.icann.org/x/SoEHAw>here.
>>
>>----------
>>Further information
>>
>>For further information about the CWG's work, please see 
>><https://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg>https://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg.
>>
>>For further information about the ICG and the IANA Stewardship 
>>Transition, please 
>>see<https://www.icann.org/stewardship>https://www.icann.org/stewardship.
>>_______________________________________________
>>ianatransition mailing list
>><mailto:[email-masked]>[email-masked]
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition
>
>_______________________________________________
>ianaxfer mailing list
><mailto:[email-masked]>[email-masked]
>https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
>_______________________________________________
>Ianaplan mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan