<html>
<body>
Thanks Chuck. That WAS in the rough notes I put together. Somehow
didn't get transcribed into my message. Thanks for catching it.
Alan<br><br>
At 12/05/2015 02:33 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Thanks Alan. It seems to
me that it would be helpful to have a representative from the Root Zone
Maintainer, whoever that is.<br>
<br>
Chuck<br>
<br>
<b>From:</b> cwg-dtf-bounces@icann.org
[<a href="mailto:cwg-dtf-bounces@icann.org" eudora="autourl">
mailto:cwg-dtf-bounces@icann.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Alan
Greenberg<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, May 12, 2015 12:46 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> CWG DT-F<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [DT-F] Meeting and draft proposal<br>
<br>
I have requested that a Doodle be sent out for a 90 minute meeting either
late this week or early next week.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
Alan<br>
=================<br><br>
<b>Draft Proposal to replace NTIA Administrative Oversight<br><br>
</b>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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
Recommendation:<br><br>
1. Final approval over such changes will be
given by the ICANN Board.<br><br>
2. Recommendations for such approval will
be given by a new Board committee which shall be composed of:<br><br>
a. One Board member, preferably with
significant knowledge of the DNS as Chair<br>
b. The senior IANA administrator or
her/his delegate<br>
c. The Chairs or their delegates of
the SSAC, RSSAC and the IETF (IAB?)<br>
d. A representative of a gTLD
operator (named by?)<br>
e. A representative of a ccTLD
operator (named by?)<br>
f. ??<br><br>
3. The above committee will involve other
experts as dictated by the subject matter at hand.<br><br>
4. For major architectural changes, there
should be wide public consultation<br><br>
5. Changes to the approval structure shall
be deemed to be a substantive change and will require committee
approval.<br><br>
6. To the extent allowed based the need for
security and contractually required confidentiality, the proceedings of
the committee should be open and transparent.</blockquote></body>
</html>