[CWG-Stewardship] Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for CWG IANA DT-F Meeting #2 on 15 April

[Brenda Brewer]

Dear all, 

 

The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA DT-F Meeting #2 on 15 April will be available
here:  https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52896693

 


Notes


 DT F call 15 April 2015 

Comments received from Milton

Timing CWG: Recommendations  DT F need to be read by tomorrow 

Structure:

Recommendations that MUST be included 

Identify topics  to be addressed later. 

Two versions: short form of recomemndation and whatever size is necessary  

Suggestion use Milton's suggestions for short document 

Identifying NTIA "routine " Authorization goes away 

1 a. Section

Why say in short term?

Currently prohibited to make changes. 

Alternative: eiither change before software, or handled on interim basis, without any need to make
change 

Chuck suggestion, make explicit. what is meant

Changes to be made 

1 b.

.Chuck suggestion, third sentences.

Add, nor whether what will be in place, 

Suggested change: 

The exact form of the latter transition is not currently known, nor what whether anything will
replace the current 
Cooperative Agreement. However, there will likelymay be a requirement to have a formal agreement
between the IANA 
Function Operator and The Root Zone Maintainer.  

Does the group want to specify additional checks and balances or leave it for later stage?

David: include as a recommendation caution not to go one entity

Chuck: suggest # 6 as suggestion 

Recommendation is: additional analysis is needed  

Recommendation 2

NTIA more extensive than anticipated first

NTIA is getting into fair amount 

Question: Is DT F going to make a recommendation or someone else 

David: Sensitivities invovled, appropriate to make recoeedation that CWG identify a party that
explores issues. 

NTIA  approval needed for different categories

Authorization of changes 

On day-to day basis

Publish reporting

Approval monthly reports

Document approval 

Question Alan: how often approval and is it real function? 

Question: what needs prior community approval, what can be done by IFO, with out prior approval by
community 

Topic needs to be considered, what needs to be reviewed/ approved 

Unclear what rationale was for NTIA.  

Question What is  current rationale, to provide guidance.? 

Are there real issues or just concerns of USG.? 

Focus on structural aspects and not on presentation aspects.  

Question Alan: Are ther topics that need to be discussed outside IAAN, but not fit for public
comment? 

Issues specific to specific situation or cases could be anissue, but not in general items 

Capture notion that check for everything creates issues by itself, at the same some items may need
to be  

Default should be on openness  and tranparancy as main principle, in some operational
circumstances,confidentiality may be required -> need to be documented 

Interaction is vast majority of cases be open and transparent.  

Note that ATRT 1 and ATRT 2, transparnacy is needed and need to be in DNA 

Chuck: timing could make it an issue. >making it public when changes already made, non-issue 

Section 3. 

Question: is this in DT O? 

DT O recommended that as the solution get more well-defined to check whether budget has covered them

DT O has included general recommendation . However suggestion to re-amphasize point.  

Cheryl: In addition to DTO recommendation  DT F specially notes inclusion of   

Issues Warranting further discussion

Simply listing allows others to pursue these items ( CSC or part of Periodic review 

If considered critical infrastructure then items should be looked at in a consistent manner.
Stornger suggestion that study must be done

to be considered by chair 

Section 5. What should be public and not be public

Recommendation  needs to be added on in line with discussion

David: Suggest to take into account phasing of change request process. Point for publication is when
validation has been completed. 

What really matters is that changes has been accepted for processing

Agree it should be studied. 

In specific cases of delegation and redelgation of ccTLD that third parties. 

Introduce new section Principles that should be adhered to 

Include transparence as well ( Section 5) 

Section 6 

Making a statement of concentration of power is appropriate 

suggestion Chuck

Currently updating the Root Zone requires the active participation of three parties, the IANA
Function Operator, the Root Zone Maintainer 
and the NTIA. Post transition there will only be the first two. DT-F recommends that the remaining
two functions should 
never be awarded to a single entity. Note that the implications of this might vary depending on
whether any or all of the 
robustness issues identified in Issue 1 have been addressed."

What i spurpose of separation of IF and RZM, is to esnure two person control. Reduce risk of
failures. malicious behaviour etc.

Risk mitigation tool

This looks at changes proposed to change implemented. 

Two parties control does not fix all problems, but catches some 

Sugestion: there should be no concentration of power but we need to explore how best to  implement
it 

Section 7

Concern: if community wants to make slower

What i spurpose of separation of IF and RZM, is to esnure two person control. Reduce risk of
failures. malicious behaviour etc.

Risk mitigation tool

This looks at changes proposed to change implemented. 

Two parties control does not fix all problems, but catches some

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150415/00a236d1/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150415/00a236d1/image001-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150415/00a236d1/smime-0001.p7s>