<p dir="ltr">Instead of support, would 'promote' be closer to what a multistakeholder community expects of an ICANN?<br>
RD</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Oct 31, 2015 5:56 PM, "Seun Ojedeji" <<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">Hi,</p>
<p dir="ltr">Would have added a +1 if mission was entirely made out of scope for the CCWG, but that is not the case as the IAB request is just one of the proposed edits of the mission statement. That said, I think the IAB's recommendation particularly have something to do with the transition since for the first time there will be a clearer process for any of the OCs to opt out of ICANN individually, It's therefore important the mission reflects that.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I have some sympathy for Paul's concern on the word "support" and I think a better phrasing may be in order. That said, such phrasing should not give the impression that there is(or can be) really a central kill switch/control of the Internet as that is the impression the current mission may have implied politically.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Cheers!</p>
<p dir="ltr">Sent from my Asus Zenfone2<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 1 Nov 2015 05:37, "Roelof Meijer" <<a href="mailto:Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl" target="_blank">Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear all,<br>
<br>
In my opinion, this has nothing to do with the IANA Stewardship Transition<br>
nor the enhancement of ICANN¹s accountability.<br>
We should not deal with this.<br>
Moreover, the argument that this is (will become) a fundamental bylaw and<br>
thus ³difficult to fix later² is incorrect. If the community feels that<br>
something should be fixed here, it will be easier than it is now.<br>
<br>
best,<br>
<br>
Roelof<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 31-10-15 09:56, "<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> on<br>
behalf of Lyman Chapin" <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a><br>
on behalf of <a href="mailto:lyman@interisle.net" target="_blank">lyman@interisle.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>Becky and CCWG members -<br>
><br>
>Because the mission statement will be a fundamental bylaw - and therefore<br>
>by design extremely difficult to "fix" later - the concern expressed by<br>
>the IAB (and echoed by others during the Dublin meeting) is a lot more<br>
>important than it might seem; it's not just a matter of preferring<br>
>different words to describe roughly the same thing. ICANN's current<br>
>mission statement is empirically incorrect; as a simple matter of fact,<br>
>ICANN does not ³coordinate, at the overall level, the global Internet¹s<br>
>system of unique identifiers.² Using the same empirical standard, the<br>
>alternatives (to this and other parts of the mission statement) proposed<br>
>by the IAB are factually accurate. On that basis alone it seems obvious<br>
>that the CCWG should prefer the IAB's formulation to the one that stands<br>
>in the current bylaws, or alternatively should work with the IAB to<br>
>develop and mutually agree upon more accurate wording, and we recommend<br>
>that it do so.<br>
><br>
>- Lyman and Julie<br>
><br>
>On Oct 30, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Burr, Becky wrote:<br>
><br>
>> CCWG Members <br>
>><br>
>> The IAB has raised a significant concern about the Mission Statement,<br>
>>which currently describes ICANN¹s role of coordinating the allocation<br>
>>and assignment of the DNS¹ unique identifiers, including Protocol port<br>
>>and parameter numbers. As some of you may recall, in early comments<br>
>>they suggested changing the word ³coordination² to ³support.² WP2<br>
>>discussed this and declined to modify the existing language in the<br>
>>Bylaws, but provided an opportunity for the ASO, the Root Server<br>
>>community, and the port/parameter community to provide their own<br>
>>description of what policy ³coordination² would mean in each (i.e.,<br>
>>names, numbers, root servers, protocol/parameters) context.<br>
>><br>
>> Andrew Sullivan, Chair of IAB, has informed me that the IAB remains<br>
>>very concerned about the Mission Statement. According to Andrew (on<br>
>>behalf of the IAB), ³the mission statement (including the chapeau) is<br>
>>misleading, has caused us problems in the past, and has been false at<br>
>>least since the end of the PSO [Protocol Supporting Organization] and<br>
>>arguably before that. In particular, according to the IAB, ³ICANN does<br>
>>not "coordinate, at the overall level, the global Internet's systems of<br>
>>unique identifiers.²<br>
>><br>
>> This issue was discussed in the Public Forum in Dublin, and Steve<br>
>>Crocker expressed support for working to align ICANN¹s description of<br>
>>its role in this area more precisely:<br>
>><br>
>> ANDREW SULLIVAN: Hi, my name is Andrew Sullivan. And I'm chair of the<br>
>>Internet Architecture Board. The mission of ICANN currently has text<br>
>>that ICANN -- and I quote -- is to coordinate at the overall level, the<br>
>>global Internet systems of unique identifiers. End quote. That's not<br>
>>precisely true any more and hasn't been at least since the protocol<br>
>>supporting organization disappeared from ICANN. I'm wondering whether<br>
>>the Board is open to changing this part of the mission since it's open<br>
>>anyway in the CCWG process?<br>
>><br>
>> STEVE CROCKER: I think I'm the designated hitter here. Andrew, thank<br>
>>you very much. There's been a somewhat uncomfortable disparity between<br>
>>some of the words that we use to describe ourselves and some of the<br>
>>words that our close friends use to describe us. We have -- and we've --<br>
>>some of us have been paying attention for a while. The good news -- I<br>
>>think it's extremely good news -- is that over the last relatively short<br>
>>period of time, we have built a much stronger technical team, step one.<br>
>>And step 2 is would are we have actually got them connected to the<br>
>>communications process. Harder than I would have liked it to have been.<br>
>>But it's now there. And it's been one of these behind the scenes things<br>
>>of where we've been pressing. So I think that, going forward, we're<br>
>>going to try to align our words in a more careful way. There's always a<br>
>>lot of equities about how many words you use to describe yourself which,<br>
>>you know. But I think some greater precision and adjustment of the<br>
>>nuances is well in order.<br>
>><br>
>> The IAB has provided some proposed text, which addresses the concerns<br>
>>of its members. I have attached a side-by-side comparison of (1) the<br>
>>Existing Mission Statement; (2) the current CCWG proposal; and (3) the<br>
>>IAB proposal. I should note that the proposed changes appear to be more<br>
>>dramatic than they actually are. Most of the changes reflect moving the<br>
>>language around. The substantive changes include:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Current Bylaws/CCWG Proposal<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> IAB Proposal<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ICANN¹s mission is to ³coordinate, at the overall level, the global<br>
>>Internet¹s system of unique identifiers²<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ICANN¹s mission is to ³support, at the overall level, core Internet<br>
>>registries²<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ICANN coordinates the allocation and assignment of ³Domain Names<br>
>>(forming a system referred to as ³DNS²)<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ICANN coordinates the allocation and assignment of ³names in the root<br>
>>zone of the Domain Name System (³DNS²)<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ICANN coordinates the ³allocation and assignment of protocol port and<br>
>>parameter numbers²<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ICANN ³collaborates with other bodies as appropriate to publish core<br>
>>registries needed for the functioning of the Internet.²<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> As indicated above, a more complete comparison is attached. Given the<br>
>>strength of the IAB¹s views on this point, I thought it was important to<br>
>>raise this issue for discussion.<br>
>><br>
>> Becky<br>
>><br>
>> J. Beckwith Burr<br>
>> Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
>><br>
>> <IAB Proposed Mission Statement Changes 30<br>
>>October.pdf>_______________________________________________<br>
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
><br>
>_______________________________________________<br>
>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>