Hello Rafik,
Are there general official call for comments for the last 2 tracks? My
understanding is that some comments on IANA transition process suggested
that those last 2 be addressed by their relevant stakeholder.
I think it will be good to have ICANN provide the final version of the
transition process as all the tracks somehow depends on it.
Regards
PS: I don't seem to have seen any update from ICANN on the process in
response to comments made.
sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 21 May 2014 02:15, "Rafik Dammak" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> below you will find a blog post from Fadi Chehade , the ICANN CEO,
> describing what he perceives as 4 tracks for the IANA transition, in
> particular the 2 last and new tracks. we may agree or disagree with this
> vision since ICANN is an interested party by the outcome of the transition.
> that is why we commented about the process for the IANA transition and
> working on commenting the ICANN accountability.
>
> it also means for us 4 tracks to follow closely and comment in due time to
> represent non-commercial interests. it is a challenge if we add also the
> comment regarding the ICANN strategy plan and other important ongoing
> policies to comment e,g New directory service, DNS in developing countries.
>
> it is important to have enough volunteers on those areas and share
> workload to be effective. I welcome any practical suggestion of how to
> cope with this flow of issues. I acknowledge that volunteering may need
> some learning curve, but volunteers will be supported and get help from
> "veterans" and NCSG officers. the drafting is also a collaborative work who
> need someone to take the led to initiate it and then bringing other to
> comments, ask questions and make edits.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Olive <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 2014-05-21 6:18 GMT+09:00
> Subject: [Soac-infoalert] Transition from U.S. Government has Four Work
> Tracks -Blog By Fadi Chehadé
> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
>
> http://blog.icann.org/
>
> http://blog.icann.org/2014/05/transition-from-u-s-government-has-four-work-tracks/
>
> *Transition from U.S. Government has Four Work Tracks *
>
> By Fadi Chehadé
>
>
>
> Nine weeks have passed since the U.S. government announced its intention
> to transition stewardship of the IANA functions to the global community.
> This landmark announcement requires a measured, thoughtful approach for how
> we – the Internet community – will map a route to a successful transition.
> Together, we must pool our efforts with a goal of producing an acceptable
> and timely proposal for a smooth transition.
>
>
>
> What is most important is that our transition process is open and
> inclusive, while maintaining a discipline and focus that will ensure our
> success within a reasonable timeline. I see our work ahead as divided into
> four concurrent tracks, and wanted to update you on where we are on each
> track.
>
>
>
> *1. Transition of U.S. government stewardship of IANA functions at ICANN*
>
> By the end of Thursday, 8 May, the community submitted more than 1,000
> emails and comments<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/2014/date.html#start>with feedback on the proposed process framework for the U.S. government
> stewardship transition process, which ICANN is facilitating. Comments were
> received online, via social media, emails as well as through two public
> dialogues at ICANN 49 in Singapore and the NETmundial meeting in Brazil.
> These comments<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/2014/date.html#start>will lead to a revised transition process framework.
>
>
>
> The goal of the process is for the global community to produce a
> transition proposal to the U.S. government. According to the National
> Telecommunications and Information Administration, this proposal must
> have broad community support and must not replace NTIA with a
> government-led or inter-governmental solution.
>
>
>
> The next few weeks will be spent reading all of the input, analyzing it
> and ultimately producing a revised transition process framework before
> ICANN 50 in June 2014.
>
>
>
> *2. Strengthen ICANN accountability*
>
> Two weeks ago we began a community discussion<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/enhancing-accountability-06may14-en.htm>on enhancement of ICANN’s accountability through the posting of a
> background document and questions for input. This dialogue is open to all.
> Please provide your comment<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/enhancing-accountability-06may14-en.htm>
> s until 27 May on how ICANN (the organization) should be accountable to
> you after the transition of the IANA stewardship. Your thoughts are welcome
> on how we can strengthen existing accountability mechanisms like the Affirmation
> of Commitments<http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/aoc/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm>.
> Additionally, your insights will help us assess ICANN’s redress mechanisms,
> and explore new accountability mechanisms where necessary. We expect
> ICANN’s Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees to finalize the
> participants in a new community Working Group that will guide this process,
> so that work can begin during ICANN’s 50th Public Meeting in London in
> June.
>
>
>
> *3. Maintain security and stability of implementation of the root zone
> updates*
>
> Currently, the process flow for root zone management involves three roles
> that are performed by three different entities: NTIA as the Administrator,
> ICANN as the Operator<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/page/iana-functions-purchase-order>,
> and Verisign as the Maintainer. After the transition, the role of NTIA as
> the Administrator will be replaced by mechanisms to be determined by you,
> the global community, to ensure ICANN’s accountability to the community on
> each request to update the root zone. ICANN will remain in its role as the
> Operator, and will establish a relationship directly with the third-party
> Maintainer.
>
>
>
> As a means to help ensure stability, ICANN’s recommended implementation
> option is to have Verisign continue its role as the Maintainer. However, we
> will be working closely with all relevant parties including the Root Zone
> Operators to ensure there are contingency options in place to meet our
> absolute commitment to the stability, security and resiliency of the Domain
> Name System.
>
>
>
> *4. Strengthen bilateral relationships with policy bodies*
>
> ICANN staff has begun initial work to review and strengthen existing
> informal and formal commitments between ICANN and the bodies that produce
> the policies implemented by the IANA department. Let me be crystal clear –
> the policies implemented by IANA are produced by the Internet Engineering
> Task Force (for protocol parameters), the Address Supporting Organization
> (for IP addresses), the Generic Names Supporting Organization (for generic
> domain names) and the ccTLDs and Country-Code Names Supporting Organization
> (for country-code domain names). We welcome your help in order to
> strengthen these relationships and the assurances of a clear division
> between the processes that produce the policies and their implementation.
>
>
>
> You can review existing commitments<http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements>with policy bodies on the following page: ICANN’s
> Major Agreements and Related Reports<http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements>.
>
>
>
>
> In addition, here are other links to major agreements and related
> documents:
>
> · ccTLDs <http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/cctlds>.
>
> · IAOC / IAB:
>
> o Original Memorandum of Understanding<http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/ietf/ietf-icann-mou-01mar00-en.htm>,
> dated 1 March 2000, RFC 2860.
>
> o Most recent MOU Supplemental Agreement<http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/ietf/ietf-iana-agreement-2014-07mar13-en>,
> effective 7 March 2014.
>
> · Number Resources Organization:
>
> o Memorandum of Understanding<http://archive.icann.org/en/aso/aso-mou-29oct04.htm>,
> dated 21 October 2004.
>
> o Exchange of Letters (NRO to ICANN-March 2009<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/akplogan-to-twomey-23mar09-en.pdf>;
> ICANN to NRO-April 2009<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/twomey-to-akplogan-17apr09-en.pdf>;
> NRO to ICANN-December 2007<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/plzak-to-twomey-17dec07-en.pdf>;
> ICANN to NRO-December 2007<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/twomey-to-plzak-19dec07-en.pdf>
> ).
>
>
>
> We have a full plate for the next 15 months. Together, we must carefully
> manage these four concurrent and inter-related tracks. And while September
> 2015 is not a deadline, we must organize ourselves on a clear timeline to
> succeed. This is critical work – and I am confident that, united, we will
> get it done.
>
>
>
> ##
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> soac-infoalert mailing list
> [log in to unmask]
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-infoalert
>
>
>
|
