[Internal-cg] Way forward/Proposal to extend the ICG charter

Fri Oct 9 07:45:04 UTC 2015

I stand by my interpretation of the charter: we are chartered to produce
a proposal and nothing else.

Daniel

On 8.10.15 21:20 , Mueller, Milton L wrote:
> Daniel is assuming that we need to modify our charter to ensure that the proposal is complete. I don't think that is a correct assumption. If you look at the charter it does allow us to oversee certain aspects of implementation
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> I remain extremely skeptical about this for the reasons I have explained
>> earlier. Those in favor should propose concrete language for a revised charter.
>> This language should describe and limit the proposed purview and actions of
>> the group as well as specify the point in time when this group will disband.
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> On 8.10.15 13:13 , Narelle Clark wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>> in our face to face meeting in LA, we decided to defer the discussion
>>> regarding what role - if any - the ICG should play during the
>>> implementation phase of the transition. Alissa also kicked off the
>>> discussion on the list. Here are some of my thoughts to guide us
>>> through to Dublin.
>>>
>>> In the comments submitted to the ICG, the Internet Society pointed out:
>>>
>>> "We would like to draw attention to the need for timely resolution of
>>> outstanding issues with regards to the implementation of the various
>>> processes, mechanisms and rules that relate to IANA. Details related
>>> to the structure of the new Post-Transition IANA (PTI) and the various
>>> bodies supporting it (e.g. CSC, IFR, etc.), implementation aspects of
>>> the CCWG proposal (as it relates to IANA), a plan to successfully
>>> conclude the SLAs, and a resolution of IANA-related intellectual
>>> property rights have yet to be fully fleshed out. We urge the
>>> community to determine:
>>>
>>> *         How these implementation details will be addressed in a timely
>>> fashion to the satisfaction of all communities in a way that continues
>>> to meet the principles set forth by NTIA; and,
>>>
>>> *         How all the communities will remain involved in the
>>> implementation of the new structure in an appropriate manner."
>>>
>>> There is no denying the fact that a major part of the transition is
>>> implementation. I would like to argue that a sound transition
>>> implementation process is actually as important as having a complete
>>> and robust proposal. At this stage I do not believe we have one.
>>>
>>> A major part of the transition is oversight: the system that
>>> ultimately replaces the oversight of the US government. I think we all
>>> agree that as a group we are responsible for ensuring that the IANA
>>> functions continue to operate in a reliable, stable and predictable
>>> way. This means a design that is able to deliver and meet the
>>> expectations and needs of the IANA customers. I do not believe that
>>> this is achieved simply by saying that we have a full proposal, when
>>> there is clearly a gap arising from the status of the accountability model.
>>>
>>> As this group has repeatedly discussed, what the current proposal
>>> foresees is that, for the purposes of the IETF and the RIRs, ICANN
>>> will continue to operate as the IFO; ICANN, would therefore
>>> subcontract this responsibility to a new PTI. The names community will
>>> contract directly with PTI. So, in effect, PTI will be the entity
>>> responsible for maintaining and operating the IANA functions. PTI,
>>> however, is a new entity that will have to be established from scratch.
>>>
>>> And here is the gap.
>>>
>>> Were the US government to sign off on the transition and with the
>>> various groups - IANAPlan, CRISP and CWG (the latter disbanded) - who
>>> will make sure that the setting up of PTI and the various supporting
>>> bodies is done in a manner that ensures the stability of the system?
>>> How can we - as the Internet community - ensure that the new system
>>> supports the ongoing performance of IANA?
>>>
>>> I think that there is a role for us. This body is the only one
>>> currently in existence that is fully representative of the communities
>>> and one that would not have the learning curve.
>>>
>>> We all have a vested interest in ensuring that IANA continues to
>>> operate the way it does today - i.e. without any interruptions or
>>> issues of stability. I am not suggesting that we should micromanage
>>> the implementation process - rather that we could perhaps take the
>>> role of some sort of an advisory body that will meet and intervene if
>>> and when it considers that the implementation details fail to meet the
>>> standards of performance expected for IANA. Indeed, to provide a form of
>> oversight.
>>>
>>> I am aware that this raises issues with our charter, however, given
>>> how lightweight the approach I am suggesting should be, this would
>>> require nothing more than a minor adjustment. This would only need to
>>> be in place until such time as PTI exists and back-to-back contracts
>>> (between the IETF, RIRs, ICANN and PTI) are in place.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course, the community would need to be in support of such a thing,
>>> and a period of public comment would be called for.
>>>
>>> The situation at present is to my mind more than a little serious. I
>>> would therefore like to ask you to consider this in good faith.
>>>
>>> What I am suggesting is a very light weight and high level engagement
>>> plan that will allow us to see through this transition. We all know
>>> just how important this is, and the need for careful, cross-community
>>> oversight until the entire system is in place.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Narelle
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Narelle Clark
>>> Director of Operations - Deputy CEO
>>> *Australian Communications *
>>>
>>> *Consumer Action Network*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Internal-cg mailing list
>>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
> 