Ah! Okay that's clear now.
Thanks!
sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 21 May 2014 09:13, "Rafik Dammak" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Seun,
>
> there are no call for comments yet, I interpret it as a kind of heads-up
> of what we should expect. 4 tracks in parallel . which have dependencies,
> may mean a lot of work and coordination to have consistent outcome.
>
> regarding the update on transition process comments, there are some in the
> blog post :"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." . it seems that we have to wait
> for some time.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rafik
>
>
>
> 2014-05-21 16:48 GMT+09:00 Seun Ojedeji <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
|
