ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

.SE remarks to draft charter for The IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG)

  • To: "'icg-forum@xxxxxxxxx'" <icg-forum@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: .SE remarks to draft charter for The IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG)
  • From: Staffan Jonson <staffan.jonson@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:13:54 +0200

.SE remarks on Draft charter for IANA Stewardship Transition

The Internet Infrastructure Foundation (.SE) welcomes the opportunity to
comment on the draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition
Coordination Group (ICG), as presented in version 6 (July 17, 2014).
In general we are pleased with the holistic approach in the draft charter
for IANA Stewardship transition. We especially welcome the idea of
soliciting broader input, information sharing and public communication.
Below we highlight remarks under four main points. 

The need for coordination of two parallel processes
One crucial aspect of continued work is the expected relation between ICG on
the one hand, and on the other hand the parallel process of enhancing ICANNs
accountability. The Draft needs to be more explicit on this relationship,
since separation of actions and accountability rarely is successful. 
We therefore would like to emphasize the need to design work process
according to different sets, or chains of accountability, in between
different actors in the global naming community. This issue is addressed
also in Centr’s draft background paper.  

The need for common principles and work principles
We believe that work need to take origin in some axiomatic principles common
to all three (naming, numbers, and protocol) groups. These principles could
be expressed e.g. in a common statement, to avoid erroneous assumptions
further down the line. Such principles could state, or even codify, what
today is taken for granted by many, but not known by others. 
For example: that Domain name services should be secure and stable, be
automated, non-discriminatory, predictable reliable etc. Such principles are
e.g. elaborated in Centr’s draft paper under Principles.
Additionally, and related to principles, is that a charter for IANA
transition need to develop consensus on basic work principles beforehand.
For example: In ICANN community, consensus is the default method of
decision-making. In a wider naming community, voting is default. Since ICG
and ICANN accountability work address wide groups of users, such fundamental
rules need to be expressed on an early stage.
Principles and work principles mentioned above has implications for the work
process, and would be necessary to take into account in an early stage.

Make sure that all proposals can reach ICG
The draft charter presented has pronounced an explicit balance of
responsibility for proposals. Draft clearly states that potential conflicts
should be handled within each of the three (naming, numbers, and protocol)
groups, and that ICG should not be presented competing proposals. This is a
form of strict decentralization of conflicting interests.
 We believe such strict rule of submitting proposals to ICG might become
counterproductive. Too strict silo management might have an inhibiting
effect of what proposals actually reach all of ICG. We believe that also
contesting proposals from respective group should have a chance to reach all
27 ICG members. 
Furthermore, if proposals are to be vetoed already within each (naming,
numbers, and protocol) group, there is a need for yet another charter for
each group respectively. This gives additional need for time. 

Community need more time for sub-consulting local communities
In preparations for the ICG we’ve seen a very compressed process for work up
till now. Under (iii) Assembling and submitting a complete proposal,
continued work process is outlined. Given the forced work process this last
summer, we would like to reiterate the need for allowing the community a
reasonable period of time for reviewing the final draft proposal, analyzing
and preparing supportive or critical comments. There is among several
stakeholders a need to sub-consult a local community before replying with
comments and remarks. Ample time for this sub-consulting is need in the

If any questions arise regarding this paper, please contact Staffan Jonson,
at iis.se, or at phone 

With Best Regards

Danny Aerts

Attachment: SE remarks on Draft charter for IANA Stewardship Transition.docx
Description: Microsoft Office

Attachment: .SE remarks IANA transition 20140815 - signed.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy