[DT-F] Meeting and draft proposal

[Alan Greenberg]

Thanks Chuck.  That WAS in the rough notes I put together. Somehow 
didn't get transcribed into my message. Thanks for catching it. Alan

At 12/05/2015 02:33 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>Thanks Alan.  It seems to me that it would be helpful to have a 
>representative from the Root Zone Maintainer, whoever that is.
>
>Chuck
>
>From: cwg-dtf-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-dtf-bounces at icann.org] 
>On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
>Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 12:46 PM
>To: CWG DT-F
>Subject: [DT-F] Meeting and draft proposal
>
>I have requested that a Doodle be sent out for a 90 minute meeting 
>either late this week or early next week.
>
>Here is a very rough draft proposal. At some point in discussions 
>(perhaps in the CWG as a whole), it was suggested that the ICANN 
>Board could be the authorization body, and I have taken that as as 
>good a proposal as any, and tried to flesh it out.
>
>Alan
>=================
>
>Draft Proposal to replace NTIA Administrative Oversight
>
>Currently the NTIA is involved in virtually all changes to the 
>architecture and implementation of the Root Zone (excluding those 
>solely within individual Root Servers?) and all operational and 
>procedural changes within IANA and the Root Zone Maintainer.
>
>DT-F has recommended that such oversight is no longer required for 
>day-to-day changes, but that oversight is still required for 
>substantive changes.
>
>Recommendation:
>
>1.      Final approval over such changes will be given by the ICANN Board.
>
>2.      Recommendations for such approval will be given by a new 
>Board committee which shall be composed of:
>
>         a.       One Board member, preferably with significant 
> knowledge of the DNS as Chair
>         b.       The senior IANA administrator or her/his delegate
>         c.       The Chairs or their delegates of the SSAC, RSSAC 
> and the IETF (IAB?)
>         d.       A representative of a gTLD operator (named by?)
>         e.       A representative of a ccTLD operator (named by?)
>         f.       ??
>
>3.      The above committee will involve other experts as dictated 
>by the subject matter at hand.
>
>4.      For major architectural changes, there should be wide public 
>consultation
>
>5.      Changes to the approval structure shall be deemed to be a 
>substantive change and will require committee approval.
>
>6.      To the extent allowed based the need for security and 
>contractually required confidentiality, the proceedings of the 
>committee should be open and transparent.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-dtf/attachments/20150512/7a56571d/attachment.html>