ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[bc-gnso] IANA Transition: Draft proposal and webinar for Naming Related Functions

  • To: BC List <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [bc-gnso] IANA Transition: Draft proposal and webinar for Naming Related Functions
  • From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 01:17:56 +0000

The IANA Transition CWG published their draft proposal for the Naming-related 
IANA functions for public comment.  
  Comments close on 22-Dec.

For BC comments, we’ll look to the BC members closely following this CWG: 
Aparna Sridhar, Phil Corwin, Tim Smith, and Angie Graves.

Also, the Coordination Working Group (CWG) is hosing webinars this week to 
brief on their proposal and collect feedback:

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 
  *   4 December from 12:30 – 14:00 UTC (time zone converter 
  *   4 December from 16:00 – 17:30 UTC (time zone converter 


Webinar Details & How to Attend

The webinars will be run in an Adobe Connect 
room<https://icann.adobeconnect.com/cwgiana/>. If you are interested in 
attending the webinar and would like to receive dial-in details, please send an 
email to grace.abuhamad@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:grace.abuhamad@xxxxxxxxx> 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 here<https://community.icann.org/x/SIEHAw>.


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:

  1.  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.
  2.  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.
  3.  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
  4.  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, availablehere<https://community.icann.org/x/SoEHAw>.


Further information

For further information about the CWG's work, please see 

For further information about the ICG and the IANA Stewardship Transition, 
please seehttps://www.icann.org/stewardship.

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy