[CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles and Criteria that Should Underpin Decisions on the Transition of NTIA Stewardship: New Draft

[Jordan Carter]

Dear Accountability colleagues

Some sections of this paper draft being discussed in the CWG are worth
noting, specifically the accountability ones.

Best
Jordan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Martin Boyle* <Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk>
Date: Tuesday, 3 March 2015
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles and Criteria that Should Underpin
Decisions on the Transition of NTIA Stewardship: New Draft
To: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>


 Colleagues,



My apologies, but following the Christmas break I failed to progress this
discussion.



I now attach a revised draft, still with a major outstanding issue in g.
(page 2).



There are two variants for g.ii.  One simply reduces the previous paragraph
to read "For ccTLDs, respect national sovereignty;" at the request of the
GAC.  The other is more closely based on, but shortens, the previous text:
"For ccTLDs, policy decisions may be made locally through nationally agreed
processes in accordance with national laws and in compliance with IETF
technical standards.  Post transition of the IANA function nothing will be
done by ICANN/IANA to impact the stable operation of ccTLD Registries and
gTLD Registries."



The draft contains a number of marked up edits from previous discussions
that seem to have general agreement.  For the text redlines:



1.       I have deleted the section heading "Introduction":  there are no
other section headings, so this appears to be superfluous.



2.       Principles b. and c. (previously sub-clauses to the heading on
security, stability and resilience) are now stand-alone at the request of
the GAC.



3.       Accountability & transparency (e.):



a.       Paragraph i:  two edits that appear to have general agreement.



b.      Paragraph ii:  a new edit to correct the text.  The new version
amends the text to reflect the sub-heading.  The old version put it the
other way around.



c.       Paragraph iv:  Footnote on capture added as requested courtesy of
Alan Greenberg & Milton Mueller.



d.      Paragraph vi:  While I think we all agree on the need for some form
of appeals process, there is still some debate as to where that should
lie.  So for example, the appeals process might well not be designed by the
CWG and might be the responsibility of the CCWG.  For ccTLDs, it might mean
that a third party might have a say over a national decision on a ccTLD.  I
flag this in case further thought is needed in the light of discussion over
the last few days.



4.       Service levels (f.):



a.       Paragraph ii:  I think the majority view is that automation should
only be for routine functions (and not for controversial or subjective
decisions such as on redelegations).



b.      Paragraph iii:  Previously a stand-alone point.



5.       Policy based (g):  other than some minor editing, there are two
alternatives for g.ii. as noted above.  I would note that there was no
support in our last discussion to retain g.vi. (require bottom-up
modalities) as this is treated elsewhere (in particular in the chapeau text
to g.).



6.       Diversity of customers (h.):  some (I hope) minor and
uncontroversial edits in the chapeau and in i. and ii.  The text in
paragraph iii was generally agreed.



7.       Separability:  modifications to i.i. and i.iii generally agreed in
the last discussion.



8.       Multi-stakeholder principle paragraph j:  generally agreed in the
last discussion subject to concerns about wording (the previous text
appeared to recommend direct involvement in the management of the IANA
function).



-- 
Jordan Carter
Chief Executive, InternetNZ

+64-21-442-649 | jordan at internetnz.net.nz

Sent on the run, apologies for brevity
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150304/30ac2598/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Draft of Principles - updated 3 March.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 55389 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150304/30ac2598/DraftofPrinciples-updated3March.docx>