IAB comments on CCWG-Accountability Draft Report

[IAB Chair <iab-chair@xxxxxxx>]

To the members of the Cross Community Working Group on 
Enhancing ICANN Accountability:

The Internet Architecture Board (IAB) wishes to comment specifically
on the bylaws changes proposed in paragraphs 52-63 of the
CCWG-Accountability Draft Report as posted at
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-proposal-with-annexes-04may15-en.pdf.
While we feel that the principles embodied in the clarification
suggested below are important, it is our understanding that all of the
proposed bylaws changes are early drafts, and will require extensive
community review and additional revision as the proposed bylaws
changes move towards implementation. Broad discussion of all of the
implications of new bylaws language, including the specific language
below, will be necessary. In this light, our suggestions are offered
as suggestions for further improvement over the initial draft.

We suggest a clarification to the following existing bylaws text in
paragraph 56:

  "The mission of The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
  Numbers ("ICANN") is to coordinate, at the overall level, the global
  Internet's systems of unique identifiers, and in particular to ensure
  the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier
  systems.  In particular, ICANN:

  1.  Coordinates the allocation and assignment of the three sets of
  unique identifiers for the Internet, which are Domain names (forming
  a system referred to as "DNS"); Internet protocol ("IP") addresses
  and autonomous system ("AS") numbers; and Protocol port and parameter
  numbers.

  2.  Coordinates the operation and evolution of the DNS root name
  server system.

  3.  Coordinates policy development reasonably and appropriately
  related to these technical functions."

We believe the verb "coordinates" gives the wrong impression about
ICANN's core function, particularly for those outside of the ICANN
community who are not familiar with the ecosystem of entities involved
in developing and managing policies and identifier assignments related
to core Internet registries.  Furthermore, since there are many sets of
unique identifiers that ICANN is not involved in administering, it would
be more accurate to use the term "core Internet registries" rather than
referring to the Internet's unique identifier systems.  We suggest the
edited text below to make both of these points more clear:

  "The mission of The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
  Numbers ("ICANN") is to support, at the overall level, core Internet
  registries, and in particular to ensure the stable and secure
  operation of those registries.  In particular, ICANN:

  1.  Supports the allocation and assignment of values in three
  categories of registries as directed by the consensus processes in
  the responsible operational communities.  These categories are
  Domain names (forming a system referred to as "DNS"); Internet
  protocol ("IP") addresses and autonomous system ("AS") numbers;
  and Protocol parameters.

  2.  Supports the operation and evolution of the DNS root name
  server system.

  3.  Supports policy development reasonably and appropriately
  related to the DNS."

With these edits, we believe the paragraphs that further articulate
ICANN's role (57-60) would not be necessary because item (1)
circumscribes ICANN's mission to carrying out identifier allocation
and assignment at the direction of the relevant communities.  At the
very least, it obviates the need for paragraph 59, which we view as
unnecessarily constraining the relationship between the IETF and ICANN.
That relationship has benefited from fluidity over the years and that
characteristic should be preserved going forward.

On behalf of the IAB,
 Andrew Sullivan
 IAB Chair