[rpd] Progress on the IANA stewardship transition from the numbers perspective

Mon Aug 3 05:57:55 UTC 2015

Greetings,

Here is an update on the IANA stewardship proposal as it pertains the
numbering community. Community feedback is highly appreciated.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
-----
The CRISP team has been exploring the best way of informing and engaging
the numbering community as it pertains to the IANA Stewardship transition.
In that regard, an easy to understand info-graphic has been released for
the community. The info-graphic is available here:
https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/Number_Community_Proposal_Overview.pdf.
The NRO website has also been enhanced to make it more intuitive easy to
navigate. Check it here
https://www.nro.net/nro-and-internet-governance/iana-oversight

On 8 July, the Africa Domain Name System Forum 2015 held in Nairobi had a
discussion on the IANA Stewardship Transition.

REVIEW COMMITTEE CHARTER:
-----
NRO developed the Review Committee Charter. The RIRs community was given an
opportunity to give feedback on the charter. The CRISP team did not find
any inconsistency between the Review Committee Charter and the numbering
community proposal.

SLA
-----
The NRO legal team drafted the SLA that is to be signed between the RIRs
and the IANA functions operator. This arrangement will directly reflect and
enforce the IANA Numbering Services Operator’s accountability to the
Internet Number Community. The community gave its feedback on the SLA. The
CRISP team also analysed the SLA for consistency with the numbering
community proposal. The SLA is available here
https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/Numbers-SLA-1.0.pdf

IPR ISSUE - IANA.org <http://iana.org/> and IANA trademark
-----
The numbering community proposed the IPRs related to the IANA function be
held by an independent entity, preferably the IETF Trust. The other two
proposals have not contradicted this view but CWG proposal has not
expressly stated the position for the names community. ICG has requested
CWG to clarify their position on the IPR issue. CWG are still deliberating
on it, and have suggested to conduct a stress test on the whole IPR issue.
There are 3 trademarks involved: (i) "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority,"
(ii) "IANA", and (iii) the IANA Logo, which consists of IANA in stylized
letters plus Internet Assigned Numbers Authority.

The Internal ICG mailing list has this statement allegedly from the ICANN
board "The board wishes to reassure the community that in the event any of
the IANA functions are transferred away from ICANN, appropriate rights to
use the intellectual property associated with the IANA functions will be
granted without delay to the new operator or to an entity the operational
communities unanimously designate."
http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/2015-July/000814.html

THE TRANSITION AT US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
-----
On June 23, the US House of Representatives passed the DOTCOM Act, a bill
that provides for congressional oversight of a U.S. government handoff of
oversight of the IANA functions. One takeaway from congressional hearings
on the handoff was that both sides agreed that the handoff of the IANA
functions from oversight by the National Telecommunications & Information
Administration to a multistakeholder model wouldn't be ready by the Sept.
30, 2015 expiration date of the current contract with ICANN.
http://fcw.com/articles/2015/06/23/house-it-votes.aspx

ICG PROGRESS
-----
The IANA stewardship transition Coordination Group (ICG) has combined the
proposals from the numbering, protocol parameters , and names community
into one consolidated proposal. The three respective communities are
expected to study the document for compatibility and interoperability and
comment on any (in)consistencies and realignments with each other, and
ensure the proposal meet the NTIA requirements. The proposal is out for
public comment from July 31 to September 8, 2015.

Specific questions about which the ICG is seeking comment are listed below.

Questions Concerning the Proposal as a Whole

1. Completeness and clarity: Is the combined proposal complete? Each of the
operational community proposals contains aspects to be completed in the
future when the proposal is implemented. Is the combined proposal specified
in sufficient detail such that it can be evaluated against the NTIA
criteria?
2. Compatibility and interoperability: Do the operational community
proposals work together in a single proposal? Do they suggest any
incompatible arrangements where compatibility appears to be required? Is
the handling of any conflicting overlaps between the functions resolved in
a workable manner?
3. Accountability: Do the operational community proposals together include
appropriate and properly supported independent accountability mechanisms
for running the IANA functions? Are there any gaps in overall
accountability under the single proposal?
4. Workability: Do the results of any tests or evaluations of workability
that were included in the operational community proposals conflict with
each other or raise possible concerns when considered in combination?

Questions Concerning NTIA Criteria

5. Do you believe the proposal supports and enhances the multistakeholder
model? If yes, please explain why. If not, please explain why and what
proposal modifications you believe are necessary.
6. Do you believe the proposal maintains the security, stability, and
resiliency of the DNS? If yes, please explain why. If not, please explain
why and what proposal modifications you believe are necessary.
7. Do you believe the proposal meets the needs and expectations of the
global customers and partners of the IANA services? If yes, please explain
why. If not, please explain why and what proposal modifications you believe
are necessary. Please indicate if you are a customer or partner of the IANA
services.
8. Do you believe the proposal maintains the openness of the Internet? If
yes, please explain why. If not, please explain why and what proposal
modifications you believe are necessary.
9. Do you have any concerns that the proposal is replacing NTIA’s role with
a government-led or inter-governmental organization solution? If yes,
please explain why and what proposal modifications you believe are
necessary. If not, please explain why.
10. Do you believe that the implementation of the proposal will continue to
uphold the NTIA criteria in the future? If yes, please explain why. If not,
please explain why and what proposal modifications you believe are
necessary.

Questions Concerning ICG Report and Executive Summary

11. Do you believe the ICG report and executive summary accurately reflect
all necessary aspects of the overall proposal? If not, please explain what
modifications you believe are necessary.

General Questions

12. Do you have any general comments for the ICG about the proposal?

The full announcement and more information can be found at the ICG's
website:
https://www.ianacg.org/calls-for-input/combined-proposal-public-comment-period/

Sincerely,
______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
For the AFRINIC CRISP TEAM

"There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on
higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20150803/95b85d53/attachment.html>