[IANAOversight] Questions to help us set a fromework for our proposal

[Mwendwa Kivuva]

There have been very little feedback coming in on this questions. Probably
we should create a simple Google poll and see if we can get more responses
from the community. We can even post the poll on RPD.

Regards


______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
T: twitter.com/lordmwesh

______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
L: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lordmwesh
B: http://lord.me.ke/
T: twitter.com/lordmwesh

"There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on
higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson

On 27 October 2014 22:00, Adiel Akplogan <adiel at afrinic.net> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Beside  Richard Hill's proposal on this list, we have not seen any other
> substantial proposal regarding the transition. In order to move thing
> forward a little bit, I would like to share with you this set of questions
> which outcome can guide us in creating a proposal for our region but also
> for the overall number community. This set of question was developed by the
> 5 RIR and used by the other RIRs in different way (ARIN has just used them
> is a survey, RIPE is using it in their various consultations etc ...). I
> suggest that we have a look at it as well (maybe also translate it into as
> survey?).
>
> Preamble:
> 1.
> https://www.nro.net/nro-and-internet-governance/iana-oversight/rir-communications
>
> 2. The RIR communities have successful, long-established processes for
> making policy at the global and regional levels. These processes are
> defined as being open to all interested parties, transparent in their
> processes and operations, and driven by the community themselves via
> consensus decision-making ("bottom-up"). They operate predominantly at the
> regional level to create policies that address regional needs and
> interests. More rarely, they serve to create global policies for
> administering the top level of the Internet number registration hierarchy;
> these global policies are implemented by the IANA operator, a role filled
> by ICANN since 1997.
>
> RIR policy development processes pre-date ICANN and the current NTIA IANA
> contract, and the incorporation of global Internet number policies into
> that contract has not directly affected those processes. The NTIA plays no
> explicit role in making or directing policy for the operation of those IANA
> functions relating to Internet number resources.
>
> The current processes and structures have resulted in the satisfactory
> operation of the IANA functions by ICANN, under policy direction from the
> RIR communities.
>
> --------------------------------[Questions]--------------------------------
> AFRINIC is seeking agreement (or otherwise) on the following points
> regarding an AFRINIC community position on the future oversight of the IANA
> functions.
>
> ------
> 1. Do you agree that the following should be the primary priorities for
> the AFRINIC community?
> ------
>
> 1.1 There should be minimal operational change - the current processes for
> IANA operation and related policy-making are effective and allow for the
> participation of all interested parties.
>
> 1.2 Any new oversight mechanism should incorporate and build on the
> existing RIR community policy-making processes.
>
> 1.3 The RIR communities are ultimately accountable for the management of
> those IANA functions relating to management of the global Internet number
> resource pools, and this should be reflected in any new oversight
> mechanisms defined in a global proposal to NTIA.
>
> 1.4 Any other aspect that should be our priority while thinking about this?
>
> ----
> 2. Do you agree that a model for IANA oversight supported by the AFRINIC
> community should include the following elements?
> ---
>
> 2.1 ICANN has historically managed operation of the IANA functions well,
> and should continue to do so at this time.
>
> 2.2 The IANA functions operator must be answerable and accountable to the
> communities that it serves. Decisions regarding terms of service or
> duration and renewal of the contract should be made by specifically
> delegated representatives of those communities.
>
> 2.3 Funding arrangements to cover the staff, equipment and other
> operational costs associated with operation of the IANA functions should be
> transparent and stable.2.4 Efforts should be made to maintain the IANA
> functions as a "bundle", managed by a single operator.
>
> 2.5 This does not necessarily imply a single, central point of oversight
> authority - any oversight mechanism should reflect the legitimate authority
> of different communities for specific functions as they relate to number
> resources, domain names and protocol parameters.
>
> 2.6 Any other element(s) that you think should be taken into consideration
> here?
> --------------------------------[End of Questions]--------------------------------
>
> As Awe will be the last closing the loop of regional consultation in this
> process, we won't have much time after the panel at AFRINIC-21 to consult
> everyone so we imperatively need to collect as much input into this process
> now. Maybe these questions will help?
>
> - a.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ianaoversight mailing list
> ianaoversight at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ianaoversight
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/ianaoversight/attachments/20141107/87a018d0/attachment-0001.htm