[CWG-Stewardship] RZERC Charter for CWG review

[Mueller, Milton L]

From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes at verisign.com]

You seem to be assuming that the RZERC is an advisory committee for PTI.  That is not my understanding.

MM: Advisory committee for PTI? No. But confined to names in its scope? Yes. It has always been conceived that way. Alan is completely wrong that this committee was ever intended to be something that reviews the "architecture" of all the IANA functions. It has always been focused on the names root zone, which involves not just names IANA, but also the root server operators, the RZM  contractor, ICANN, and the rest of the names community.

It was proposed as part of the CWG recommendations to fulfill what NTIA now does when architectural or other technical changes are considered for root zone management.  Any such changes are definitely not restricted to names.

MM: Sorry, Chuck I am not buying this. Insofar as we are talking about root zone management, we are talking about names. There is no "root zone" for numbers or protocols.

MM: Further the NTIA did not have any authority over the "architecture" of all the IANA functions in toto. Even if they had in the past, by making the decision to have separate communities (names, numbers and protocols) develop their own proposals for the transition of their part of the IANA functions, we ended that centralization and recognized the ability of each community to select its own IFO.

ICANN  and this proposed RZERC are ONLY in a position to revamp names architecture. This proposal has to be amended to reflect that clearly, both in its composition and in its charter.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160508/8c0b765a/attachment.html>