[CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANAStewardship Discussions

Tue Nov 3 19:01:23 UTC 2015

My related E-Mail seems to have crossed with Martin’s to which I fully agree.

Best regards

Wolf-Ulrich

From: Martin Boyle 
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 6:46 PM
To: Greg Shatan ; Olivier Crepin-Leblond 
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org 
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANAStewardship Discussions

Greg, Olivier,

I’m not sure that that is the only option.  In fact I’d say that the Operational Communities need to think about what their role is, which in turn would mean that for names the Chartering Organisations should think through the implications and decide how they would best be addressed.

That could well mean that, for continuity’s sake, the CWG-Stewardship remains in place, but it is a discussion for the community to have.  Certainly it would seem to me to be logical given the understanding that has developed in the CWG, but I would have thought that a decision for the Chartering Organisations and not the CWG.

As for the role of the ICG (and this is a personal view), I can see and understand that there is a possible role for the ICG should the Operational Communities find this useful.  However, I would be nervous about the ICG having a lead role and reinterpreting the consensus reached by the OCs.

Hope this helps:  I guess the decision on implementation needs to be made as/when the Chartering Organisations sign off on the complete names package.

Martin

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
Sent: 03 November 2015 15:49
To: Olivier Crepin-Leblond
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions

That is my understanding as well.

Greg

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:

Hello all,

my immediate reaction is that if the ICG has given up the responsibility of the oversight role in the implementations, this prompts each operational community to perform this oversight and this translates to CWG Stewardship having oversight of the implementation of our recommendations.
Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 03/11/2015 14:46, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

  In looking at what I think is the latest version of the Action Item Inventory, it looks like the ICG no longer is listed as the responsible party for implementation of any of the Names action items but I do note that in the oversight responsibility is shown as TBD for all of the Names action items.  At what point do we need to decide who has the oversight responsibility?

  Chuck

  From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
  Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 8:26 AM
  To: Grace Abuhamad; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
  Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions

  Thanks Grace.  Based on the ICG decisions in Dublin, it appears that they will not be performing an oversight role of the implementation of the CWG Stewardship recommendations.  I think that means that we may need to update our implementation action item spreadsheet to remove the ICG as one of the responsible parties for certain action items.  I also think that the CWG may then be the responsible party in places where we listed the ICG.

  Chuck

  From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad
  Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 12:31 AM
  To: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
  Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions

  Original link:https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-discussions

  Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions
  Following ICANN54, the IANA Stewardship Transition is now a step closer
  The ICG and CCWG-Accountability met in Dublin during ICANN54 to continue work on their proposals in wake of the feedback received during the two public comment periods that ended in September. The ICG was successful in completing its Consolidated IANA Stewardship Proposal and is now awaiting the finalization of the CCWG-Accountability’s Work Stream 1 Recommendations. When CCWG-Accountability finalizes its Work Stream 1 recommendations, and the CWG-Stewardship confirms that the recommendations meet its requirements, the ICGcan consider its proposal complete and begin the process of submitting it to the NTIA.

  Consolidated IANA Stewardship Proposal
  Taking into account an analysis of the public comments received during the public comment period that ended on 8 September 2015, and after a number of working sessions duringICANN54 in Dublin, the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) has announcedthat it has finalized its proposal. However, before the ICG sends the proposal to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) via the ICANN Board, it will first confirm with the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship) that its accountability requirements have been met by Work Stream 1 recommendations currently being finalized by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability).TheICG has decided to keep its mailing lists active until 30 September 2016 to enable the community to continue to contact them, if needed. It is also seeking feedback from the threeIANA operational communities (names, numbers and protocol parameters) to see if they would like ICG to play a role during the implementation of the IANA Stewardship Transition. The ICGwill not hold any more face-to-face meetings and will only hold conference calls on an as-needed basis.

  There are still some implementation details to be finalized for the transition, including the issue of the IANA trademark and intellectual property rights (IPR). The CWG-Stewardship will work with the two other operational communities to find a solution to the IPR issue that meets the needs of all three communities.

  CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 1 Recommendations
  Following the 12 September end of the public comment period for the 2nd Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations, the CCWG-Accountability held a face-to-face meeting, 25-26 September, in Los Angeles, and a number of working sessions in Dublin during ICANN54. As a result of its work to incorporate the feedback from the community, including feedback from the ICANN Board, the CCWG-Accountability made a number of adjustments and refinements to its draft recommendations. As a result of the adjustments, the CCWG-Accountability has decided to send the revised recommendations for a third public comment period.

  The third comment period will have a two-stage approach so the community can begin reviewing the materials as soon as possible. This is to enable the report on Work Stream 1 recommendations to be finalized and sent to the ICANN Board by mid January 2016, ensuring there are minimal effects on the timeline of the IANA Stewardship Transition.

  Key dates
        15 Nov 2015
       A high-level overview of Work Stream 1 Recommendations and a summary of changes from the 2nd Draft Proposal to be:

        1.      Released for a 35-day public comment period

        2.      Sent to the CCWG-Accountability’s Chartering Organizations for their feedback

        30 Nov 2015
       Full third draft report on Work Stream 1 Recommendations released for 20 days of consultation

        Early Jan 2016
       Amended report submitted to Chartering Organizations

        Mid Jan 2016
       Potential face-to-face meeting for Chartering Organizations, if needed, to decide whether to support the report

        Mid Jan 2016
       CCWG-Accountability to submit final report to the ICANN Board, enabling theICG to also submit its final report

  For more information on the amendments that the CCWG-Accountability decided to pursue in Dublin, see the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability ICANN54 co-Chairs' Statement.

  IANA Stewardship Transition in the news
        27 Oct 2015
       Governments v. ICANN: The Last Battle Before the IANA Transition, Council on Foreign Relations [EN]

        23 Oct 2015
       ICANN and IANA: Making the right – not a rash – decision, American Enterprise Institute [EN]

        13 Oct 2015
       Perché 40 mila ore di lavoro non sono bastate a trovare un accordo sul futuro di Internet senza la guida USA, CheFuturo! [IT]

        29 Sep 2015
       IANA-Aufgabe durch USA weiter unter Zeitdruck: Auf Messers Schneide, Heise [DE]

  You can play a role in IANA’s future…
  Anyone can participate in discussions about the future of IANA's stewardship and ICANNaccountability. For information on joining CCWG-Accountability, contact accountability-staff at icann.org.

  Compiled on behalf of ICANN by Samantha Dickinson | 2 November 2015

_______________________________________________CWG-Stewardship mailing listCWG-Stewardship at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship 

_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20151103/71482877/attachment-0001.html>