[Internal-cg] ICG Call: NTIA Role

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Martin
Tks again.
I agree with you
Have nice time
Kavouss

2015-04-23 12:51 GMT+02:00 Martin Boyle <Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk>:

>  Dear Kavouss,
>
>
>
> As in my earlier mail to the list today, the draft for comments has been
> published so it is out of our hands to make wording changes now – we need a
> stable document for consultation to be fair to everyone now working on
> their analysis and comments.  However, I think that section III.A, The
> elements of this proposal, on pp 18 onwards has to be seen in its entirety
> as it goes over the different elements of the model and the relationship
> between them.
>
>
>
> I perhaps should have mentioned yesterday that the names of the different
> elements have changed in drafts from those given in the chart I used to
> talk us through the document.  In the consultation draft, “periodic review
> function” or PRF on the chart became the “IANA function review” or IFR:
> while the proposal is for the reviews to take place every five years, it is
> possible for a special review to be set up, so the term periodic does not
> quite match with the proposal.  Otherwise I think I did manage to keep to
> current terminology.
>
>
>
> Best
>
>
>
>
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> *From:* Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 22 April 2015 19:02
> *To:* Martin Boyle
> *Cc:* internal-cg at ianacg.org
> *Subject:* Re: ICG Call: NTIA Role
>
>
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> Tks for explanation
>
> The first part of the message " In the model in front of us today, at
> transition ICANN would take the NTIA responsibility for a contract with its
> affiliate (subsidiary) the PTI " is not clearly mentioned in CWG where as
> it was especifically mentioned in Legal  Memo dated 04 April as I did cite
> in previous message .
>
> For the rest I have the same understanding as your
>
>  Consequently, the part that ICANN WILL PERFORM THE CURRENT ROLE OF NTIA
> needs to be mentioned at the beginning of the CSC paragraph e.g.
>
> While ICANN would take the NTIA responsibility for a contract with its
> affiliate (subsidiary) the PTI – where PTI is the contractor currently
> providing the IANA functions operator, the IANA division in ICANNm, CSC is
> to carry out the operational responsibilities associated with managing the
> contract.
>
> This paraphrasing is necessary to avoid misinterpreting the Roles of icann
> AND THE rOLE of CSC.
>
> It is always good to talk with Professional that nicely, quietly and
> respectfully provide the clarification.
>
> Aggressive Approach does not work at least with me.
>
> I have never ever yeilded to any pressure at all and will not do it
>
> Tks again it was a kind and helpful clarification.
>
> Regards
>
> Kavouss .
>
>
>
> 2015-04-22 19:01 GMT+02:00 Martin Boyle <Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk>:
>
> Hi Kavouss,
>
>
>
> There seems to me that there was some confusion between us on the role of
> the NTIA and how the names proposal would address this.
>
>
>
> The NTIA has a number of roles – identified in the document which went to
> consultation in December.  I’m sorry if I did not make clear that I was
> looking at NTIA’s role in letting the contract and its ability to terminate
> and re-tender.
>
>
>
> One key part of the CWG’s discussion has been focussed on separability – a
> role that NTIA currently has by virtue of its contract with ICANN for the
> role of IANA functions operator.  The contract approach allows the role to
> be reassigned in the case of the IANA functions operator failing to meet
> obligations and failing to remedy the failings.
>
>
>
> In the model in front of us today, at transition ICANN would take the NTIA
> responsibility for a contract with its affiliate (subsidiary) the PTI –
> where PTI is the contractor currently providing the IANA functions
> operator, the IANA division in ICANN.
>
>
>
> The role of the CSC is to carry out the operational responsibilities
> associated with managing the contract.  Its role is quite limited in that
> it monitors performance against the agreed service level targets and works
> with PTI to ensure that concerns are addressed.  The CSC does not make the
> decision on the future of the contract.
>
>
>
> For other roles of the NTIA, we recommend:
>
> •             Discontinuing the third party authorisation of changes to
> the registries;
>
> •             Further work on dealing with appeals on changes to the
> registries;
>
> •             Using the CSC and PRF to process changes to service level
> agreements and other operational conditions;  and
>
> •             Using the CSC (and/or the PRF) to initiate discussion on
> structural or operational changes (the introduction of DNSSEC was the
> example I used) but leave open for the moment who might authorise change.
>
> (I might have missed something, so do not treat this as a definitive
> list.  There’s also a lot of detail I have not covered.)
>
> However, all of these would come back to ICANN to implement or cause to be
> implemented.
>
>
>
> Hope this helps
>
>
>
> Martin
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/attachments/20150423/fa120a2a/attachment.html>