[Internal-cg] [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANA StewardshipDiscussions

Tue Nov 3 20:02:46 UTC 2015

Wolf’s statement corresponds to my understanding, also.

The ICG will remain in existence at least until September, 2016. During that time it will continue to fulfill its information clearinghouse role as outlined in its charter. If, during the implementation phase, there are people who feel that any one of the operational communities is straying from the correct path, it will be possible for them to notify the ICG and for the ICG to respond by publicizing these concerns, by sending questions to the specific OC, to the broader community, or to the NTIA. ICG will also be available to provide a forum where the various parties can, through their representatives on the ICG, engage in dialogue about these problems. This is what ICG has done all along.

In short, the OCs are fully responsible for implementation and the ICG does not have hard “oversight” authority in the sense that it can tell anyone what to do, but it can and will continue to serve as a public, central clearinghouse where information about the implementation and other developments related to the transition can be shared and actions coordinated as necessary.

--MM

From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2015 12:56 PM
To: Greg Shatan; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org; ICG
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANA StewardshipDiscussions

Just to be clear: the ICG did not “give up responsibility” in this respect. We had a lengthy debate on 1. whether the ICG should have a role during the implementation phase and 2. in case how this role could be characterised. There was unanimous consensus that the implementation of the 3 proposals which the ICG combined to a single one should lie in hands of the operational communities. The ICG understands that the OCs will determine the implementation processindetail. If it turns out from these discussions that ICG involvement is needed (as oversight or any other form of participation) the ICG would be open to those requirements.

Best regards

Wolf-Ulrich

From: Greg Shatan<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 4:48 PM
To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond<mailto:ocl at gih.com>
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANA StewardshipDiscussions

That is my understanding as well.

Greg

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com<mailto:ocl at gih.com>> wrote:
Hello all,

my immediate reaction is that if the ICG has given up the responsibility of the oversight role in the implementations, this prompts each operational community to perform this oversight and this translates to CWG Stewardship having oversight of the implementation of our recommendations.
Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 03/11/2015 14:46, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
In looking at what I think is the latest version of the Action Item Inventory, it looks like the ICG no longer is listed as the responsible party for implementation of any of the Names action items but I do note that in the oversight responsibility is shown as TBD for all of the Names action items.  At what point do we need to decide who has the oversight responsibility?

Chuck

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 8:26 AM
To: Grace Abuhamad; cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions

Thanks Grace.  Based on the ICG decisions in Dublin, it appears that they will not be performing an oversight role of the implementation of the CWG Stewardship recommendations.  I think that means that we may need to update our implementation action item spreadsheet to remove the ICG as one of the responsible parties for certain action items.  I also think that the CWG may then be the responsible party in places where we listed the ICG.

Chuck

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 12:31 AM
To: cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions

Original link:https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-discussions

Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions
Following ICANN54, the IANA Stewardship Transition is now a step closer

The ICG and CCWG-Accountability met in Dublin during ICANN54<https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54> to continue work on their proposals in wake of the feedback received during the two public comment periods that ended in September. The ICG was successful in completing its Consolidated IANA Stewardship Proposal and is now awaiting the finalization of the CCWG-Accountability’s Work Stream 1 Recommendations. When CCWG-Accountability finalizes its Work Stream 1 recommendations, and the CWG-Stewardship confirms that the recommendations meet its requirements, the ICGcan consider its proposal complete and begin the process of submitting it to the NTIA.

Consolidated IANA Stewardship Proposal

Taking into account an analysis of the public comments<https://www.dropbox.com/s/j07zo4malyc2sx6/Public%20Comment%20Summary%20-%2023Oct15-f2f%20edits-clean.docx?dl=0> received during the public comment period<https://www.ianacg.org/calls-for-input/combined-proposal-public-comment-period/> that ended on 8 September 2015, and after a number of working sessions<https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule-table?combine=ICG> duringICANN54<https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54> in Dublin, the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG<http://www.ianacg.org/>) has announced<https://www.ianacg.org/icg-completes-its-work-and-awaits-conclusion-of-ccwg-on-enhancing-icann-accountability/>that it has finalized its proposal<http://www.ianacg.org/icg-files/documents/IANA-transition-proposal-v9.pdf>. However, before the ICG sends the proposal to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/>) via the ICANN Board, it will first confirm with the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/CWG+to+Develop+an+IANA+Stewardship+Transition+Proposal+on+Naming+Related+Functions>) that its accountability requirements have been met by Work Stream 1 recommendations currently being finalized by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability<https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/CCWG+on+Enhancing+ICANN+Accountability>).TheICG has decided to keep its mailing lists active until 30 September 2016 to enable the community to continue to contact them, if needed. It is also seeking feedback from the threeIANA operational communities (names, numbers and protocol parameters) to see if they would like ICG to play a role during the implementation of the IANA Stewardship Transition. The ICGwill not hold any more face-to-face meetings and will only hold conference calls on an as-needed basis.

There are still some implementation details to be finalized for the transition, including the issue of the IANA trademark and intellectual property rights (IPR). The CWG-Stewardship will work with the two other operational communities to find a solution to the IPR issue that meets the needs of all three communities.

CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 1 Recommendations

Following the 12 September end of the public comment period<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-2015-08-03-en> for the 2nd Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-draft-2-proposal-work-stream-1-recs-03aug15-en.pdf>, the CCWG-Accountability held a face-to-face meeting<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-2015-08-03-en>, 25-26 September, in Los Angeles, and a number of working sessions<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56134263> in Dublin during ICANN54. As a result of its work to incorporate the feedback from the community, including feedback from the ICANN Board, the CCWG-Accountability made a number of adjustments and refinements to its draft recommendations. As a result of the adjustments, the CCWG-Accountability has decided to send the revised recommendations for a third public comment period.

The third comment period will have a two-stage approach so the community can begin reviewing the materials as soon as possible. This is to enable the report on Work Stream 1 recommendations to be finalized and sent to the ICANN Board by mid January 2016, ensuring there are minimal effects on the timeline of the IANA Stewardship Transition.

Key dates

15 Nov 2015

A high-level overview of Work Stream 1 Recommendations and a summary of changes from the 2nd Draft Proposal to be:
1.      Released for a 35-day public comment period
2.      Sent to the CCWG-Accountability’s Chartering Organizations for their feedback

30 Nov 2015

Full third draft report on Work Stream 1 Recommendations released for 20 days of consultation

Early Jan 2016

Amended report submitted to Chartering Organizations

Mid Jan 2016

Potential face-to-face meeting for Chartering Organizations, if needed, to decide whether to support the report

Mid Jan 2016

CCWG-Accountability to submit final report to the ICANN Board, enabling theICG to also submit its final report

For more information on the amendments that the CCWG-Accountability decided to pursue in Dublin, see the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability ICANN54 co-Chairs' Statement<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/Cross%20Community%20Working%20Group%20on%20Enhancing%20ICANN%20Accountability%20ICANN54%20co-Chairs%27%20Statement>.

IANA Stewardship Transition in the news

27 Oct 2015

Governments v. ICANN: The Last Battle Before the IANA Transition<http://blogs.cfr.org/cyber/2015/10/27/governments-v-icann-the-last-battle-before-the-iana-transition/>, Council on Foreign Relations [EN]

23 Oct 2015

ICANN and IANA: Making the right – not a rash – decision<https://www.aei.org/publication/icann-and-iana-making-the-right-not-a-rash-decision/>, American Enterprise Institute [EN]

13 Oct 2015

Perché 40 mila ore di lavoro non sono bastate a trovare un accordo sul futuro di Internet senza la guida USA<http://www.chefuturo.it/2015/10/accordo-futuro-internet-usa/>, CheFuturo! [IT]

29 Sep 2015

IANA-Aufgabe durch USA weiter unter Zeitdruck: Auf Messers Schneide<http://www.heise.de/netze/meldung/IANA-Aufgabe-durch-USA-weiter-unter-Zeitdruck-Auf-Messers-Schneide-2832298.html>, Heise [DE]

You can play a role in IANA’s future…

Anyone can participate in discussions about the future of IANA's stewardship and ICANNaccountability. For information on joining CCWG-Accountability, contact accountability-staff at icann.org<mailto:accountability-staff at icann.org>.

Compiled on behalf of ICANN by Samantha Dickinson | 2 November 2015

_______________________________________________

CWG-Stewardship mailing list

CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship

_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship

________________________________
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/attachments/20151103/1305ac69/attachment.html>