Comments on the conclusions and recommendations of the review of RSSAC

[Andrei Robachevsky <andrei@xxxxxxxx>]

These are the comments from the RIPE NCC, operator of the
k.root-server.net root name server and member of the Root Server
Operators group and the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC).

We think the recommendations produce a good basis for discussions, but
would suggest going even further with some of the recommendations.

1. We consider the recommendation to relaunch the RSSAC as a joint
strategy group as most important and regard it as a step in the right
direction. We would further propose that a true coordination body be
created, equally accountable to and resourced by ICANN and the Root
Server Operators. We think it is important that this body be given a new
name in order to make this change very clear. For instance, the "Root
Server System Coordination Committee", or RSSCC (hereafter referred to
as "the Committee").

2. The coordination nature of the Committee should also be reflected in
its "Terms of Reference".

3. The dual accountability of the Committee should be safeguarded by
some tangible requirements. We suggest that the Committee formally
presents an annual report to both the ICANN Board and the Root Server
Operators. Also, any report or recommendation produced by the Committee
should be made available to both parties at the same time.

4. With regards to the proposed composition of the Committee, we feel
that including IANA is essential. However, to ensure the composition is
well balanced, an increase in the number of members may be necessary.
Adding two further representatives of the Root Server Operators, as well
as a representative of the ICANN Board should be considered.

5. As noted in other comments, the recommendation for the Committee to
meet at each ICANN meeting will significantly and negatively affect
attendance by the Root Server Operators and the technical Internet
community. We consider this an undesirable outcome. Without being too
prescriptive, we would recommend that the Committee meet at at least one
ICANN meeting and at at least one IETF meeting per year. A
recommendation that the meeting schedule be made publicly available well
in advance could contribute to the transparency and approachability of
the Committee.

We would like to thank Westlake Consulting Limited for providing a
thorough review and balanced recommendations and hope that our
suggestions will help to make the Committee more focused and effective.

Regards,

Andrei Robachevsky
RIPE NCC, Operator of K-root