[Internal-cg] how collaboration works today between the OCs

[WUKnoben]

I think this is a good summary - at least for insiders. I wonder whether we 
shouldn't be a bit more specific on how the interrelation between the OCs 
works. "A web of relationships exists between these OCs, and the 
relationships and mechanisms evolve as needed." Some examples may be 
helpful: ICANN board membership, cross-membership between OCs, 
cross-community working groups...

Just an idea.

Wolf-Ulrich

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- 
From: Lynn St.Amour
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:26 PM
To: IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] how collaboration works today between the OCs

Hi,

sending again, as I did not see this come through on our list.

--------------

Please find attached the suggested text for action item:

10) St. Amour, Gerich, and Fältström to summarize how collaboration works 
today between the OCs.

Our task was to summarize how collaboration works today between the OCs.  In 
doing so, we recognized that the 3 OC model had not really been elaborated 
on in the ICG's proposal and as that was the basic underpinning, we tried to 
cover both.

Our current thinking is that in Part 0 a new section after paragraph 01 
could be useful.  Basically, a high level model introduction (although Part 
0 is evolving quite significantly and there may be a better place).

The text below is based on RFC 2860, SAC-067, and the Internet Organizations 
(I*) Shared Resource document at 
https://www.internetsociety.org/sites/default/files/is-internetresources-201308-en.pdf 
.   Note: the text below would need to incorporate appropriate references.

There has been a significant level of discussion on this amongst the group 
members.  Elise has some concerns and we agreed to highlight that fact to 
the ICG as part of our review.  I will leave it to Elise to share those 
concerns if they have still not been adequately addressed..

<start>

The Internet’s incredible growth and success has been due in large part to 
its shared global ownership, use of open standards, and freely accessible 
processes for technology and policy development.  The smooth operation of 
the Internet depends upon a global, collaborative and community-driven 
approach to managing key shared resources.

Some of the most important shared resources are Internet Protocol addresses, 
Domain Names/DNS Root Zone Management, and Protocol Parameters.    Taken 
together these are referred to as the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority 
(IANA) Function.

The IANA Functions Operator (IFO) performs a set of administrative 
coordinating services, under policy direction from 3 Operating Communities 
(OCs), for many of the identifiers that allow the global Internet to 
operate.  The three “operational communities” (OCs) are: the domain names 
community (organized around ICANN’s supporting organizations and advisory 
committees); the number resources community (organized around the regional 
address registries or RIRs); and the protocol parameters community 
(organized around the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)).

The identifiers are:

1) Domain Name System (DNS) Root Zone;
2) Internet Numbers Registry;
3) Protocol Parameter Registry, including the “Address and Routing Parameter 
Area” (.ARPA) TLD;
4) INTernational treaty organizations (.INT) top-level domain.

The services above are performed under a number of independent operational 
agreements between the Operating Communities (OC) and ICANN (as the current 
IANA Functions Operator), as well as under a contract between ICANN and the 
USG Department of Commerce given their stewardship role over these 
functions.

It is important to note that the Policy and many of the Oversight 
responsibilities for these tasks lie with the operational communities and 
not the IANA Functions Operator (IFO), hence they do not form part of the 
IFO's responsibilities.

-- Policies are defined as "the agreed upon rules developed through 
community-based processes by which shared Internet resources are managed".
-- Oversight here is defined as "to ensure policies and implementation are 
aligned and promote the coherent long-term development and use of shared 
Internet resources."
-- Implementation of such shared Internet resources (i.e. IANA Functions) 
should be "in a neutral and responsible manner, guided by the relevant 
policy and oversight processes".

Community specific (and community defined) global policy development and 
oversight processes exist in the OCs as part of their responsibilities for 
ensuring the continued smooth operation of the global Internet.  A web of 
relationships exists between these OCs, and the relationships and mechanisms 
evolve as needed.  This transition proposal was developed by the 3 OCs, and 
existing coordination mechanisms were used to ensure its overall coherence.

Coordination across the OCs is clearly an essential component to the 
Internet's successful development, and collaboration is an integral part of 
the OCs operating and policy development processes.   In the specific case 
of the IANA Functions, each community has clearly restated their ongoing 
commitment to cooperation.  That commitment to cooperate has led to the 
situation we have today, where nearly all registries are with the IANA 
Functions Operator (at ICANN) even though the operational and policy 
decisions for where these registries will be located, and how they will be 
run, is decentralized.

<end>

This could be further edited or split if it fits better elsewhere.   We look 
forward to the ICG's comments.

Best,
Lynn, Patrik, Elise



_______________________________________________
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org