[CCWG-ACCT] Suggested text relating to ICANN's role with respect to rood servers
Martin.Boyle at nominet.uk
Tue Feb 9 12:40:32 UTC 2016
.int was discussed in the CWG-Stewardship - I'd need to look up what the conclusion was, but I'd note that .int is considered as one of the IANA roles and the CWG considered that it was up to subsequent discussion to consider whether the status quo needed to be reassessed in a post-implementation process.
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Nigel Roberts
Sent: 09 February 2016 10:10
To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Suggested text relating to ICANN's role with respect to rood servers
In terms of accountability, ICANN needs strongly to consider separation.
It cannot be both gamekeeper and poacher, or perhaps a better metaphor, both referee and player.
I submit to the WG that it needs to consider a plan to transition its roles as registry operator (.INT, .ARPA) and as root server operator, so as to remove any appearance of bias in its 'co-ordination' role.
(See McGonnell v UK for the definition of apparent bias).
On 09/02/16 09:18, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
> Hello All,
> Below is some revised text regarding ICANN scope of responsibilities related to root servers.
> The text is not separated into two separate points. One relates to coordination role and the other relates to the operational role.
> 1) "Facilitates coordination of the operation and evolution of the DNS
> root name server system."
> 2) "In its role, ICANN also participates in the operation of DNS root
> name server system in keeping with ICANN¹s security and stability remit."
> Bruce Tonkin
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community