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 > > >