[NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: [IANAxfer at apnic] ICANN Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal - Number, Community-Related Analysis

Izumi Okutani izumi at nic.ad.jp
Tue Mar 1 05:00:33 CET 2016


Dear Colleagues,


FYI, I would like to share it here on the global list - while I trust this post has been shared or to be shared in respective RIR Mailing lists.

I would like to especially bring to your attention, the minority statement by the ASO to the CCWG's finalised proposal. 
It is related to signing and implementation of the SLA on IANA Numbering Services, which ver.4 has been published on 25th Feb by NRO and shared on this list.

Note that our minority statement is not directly related to contents of the recommendations in the CCWG proposal.
However, we believe it is important to clarify our point as the minority statement, given the number resources community rely on our SLA to fulfill our expectations of ICANN accountability.
Below is a recap of what we have stated, including the time frame of signing of the SLA (also shared in the attached email under 3)).

“The ASO notes that the Internet Numbering Community is not relying on
the CCWG-ACCT WS1 proposal to fulfill our expectations of ICANN
accountability. Instead we will rely primarily on a contractual
agreement (or “SLA”) between the RIRs and ICANN, as defined within the
CRISP and ICG proposals, to provide the required accountability mechanisms.

In order to serve this purpose, the proposed SLA must be in place at the
time of the IANA Transition. However, the agreement contains “condition
precedent” language such that, even if it is signed immediately, it will
only come into effect when ICANN is actually released from its related
duties under the NTIA contract.

Negotiation of the Numbers Community SLA is nearly complete, and we
expect to reach agreement in the near future. We propose to then
promptly sign the agreed SLA with ICANN, in the same timeframe as
implementation of the CCWG recommendations. By having both components in
place at that time, we will be satisfied that all ICANN accountability
matters are properly resolved.”

In addition, in the IANA Stewardship Transition context, the ICG will secure confirmation from the CWG that its accountability requirements have been met, before sending this proposal to the NTIA via the ICANN Board: https://www.icann.org/stewardship



Regards,
Izumi

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [IANAxfer at apnic] ICANN Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal - Number, Community-Related Analysis
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:08:48 +0900
From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp>
To: <ianaxfer at apnic.net> <ianaxfer at apnic.net>

Dear colleagues,

We would like to inform you that the Cross Community Working Group on
Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG) has published its Supplemental
Final Proposal, available here:
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=58723723

----------------------------------------
Amendments from the third Draft Proposal
----------------------------------------

The ASO representatives to the CCWG communicated an analysis of the
third Draft Proposal on 16 December 2015:
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/2015-December/000817.html


The following analysis relates to numbering-related amendments
introduced in the Supplemental Final Proposal since that earlier draft:

1) Mission statement

ICANN’s Mission with respect to numbers has been further clarified. It
now reads:

“The Mission of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
("ICANN") is to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s
unique identifier systems as described below. Specifically, ICANN […]
Coordinates the allocation and assignment of the top-most level of
Internet Protocol (“IP”) and Autonomous System (“AS”) numbers. In this
role, ICANN provides registration services and open access for global
number registries as requested by the Internet Engineering Task Force
and the Regional Internet Registries and facilitates the development of
related global number registry policies by the affected community as
agreed with the RIRs”.

See Annex 05 - Recommendation #5:
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58723723/Annex%2005%20-%20FINAL.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1456093917000&api=v2

2) Reconsideration process

The scope of the Reconsideration process explicitly does not include
disputes related to Internet number resources.

Please see Annex 08 - Recommendation #8:
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58723723/Annex%2008%20-%20FINAL.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1456094541000&api=v2

3) Minority statement

The ASO submitted the following minority statement into the CCWG
process, and it has been included in the Supplemental Final Proposal:

“The ASO notes that the Internet Numbering Community is not relying on
the CCWG-ACCT WS1 proposal to fulfill our expectations of ICANN
accountability. Instead we will rely primarily on a contractual
agreement (or “SLA”) between the RIRs and ICANN, as defined within the
CRISP and ICG proposals, to provide the required accountability mechanisms.

In order to serve this purpose, the proposed SLA must be in place at the
time of the IANA Transition. However, the  agreement contains “condition
precedent” language such that, even if it is signed immediately, it will
only come into effect when ICANN is actually released from its related
duties under the NTIA contract.

Negotiation of the Numbers Community SLA is nearly complete, and we
expect to reach agreement in the near future. We propose to then
promptly sign the agreed SLA with ICANN, in the same timeframe as
implementation of the CCWG recommendations. By having both components in
place at that time, we will be satisfied that all ICANN accountability
matters are properly resolved.”

-----------
Next steps
-----------

The CCWG has sent the Supplemental Final Proposal to the working group’s
six Chartering Organizations, including the ASO, and asked them to
consider and approve the document by 9 March 2016 in order to meet the
overall timing requirements, and allow the IANA Stewardship Transition
(as a whole) to proceed.

In parallel, the CWG-Stewardship is expected to deliver its confirmation
that its dependencies have been met, in order to allow the IANA
Stewardship Transition proposal to move forward.

The ASO representatives to the CCWG will soon send a recommendation to
the NRO EC regarding approval of the Supplemental Final Proposal.  If
you object to approval, please respond giving reasons.


Thank you,

Izumi Okutani
ASO representative to the CCWG
_______________________________________________
IANAxfer mailing list
IANAxfer at apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer





More information about the ianaxfer mailing list