<div dir="ltr">Hi all,<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 17 April 2015 at 14:01, Alan Greenberg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" target="_blank">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">1.<br>
<br>
Milton has asked (several times) WHY we want to ensure that the IANA Functions Operator and Root Zone Maintainer must be separate entities. The answers I have heard to date do not (in my mind, or presumably Milton's) really explain why the two-party solution is better. With the current architecture, most or all errors that Verisign could catch would also be catchable in a single-party implementation.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>In the operation of the IANA functions and their stewardship, through to the root zone, there are currently three significant parties: the NTIA, ICANN and Verisign.</div><div><br></div><div>With the end of the IANA Functions Contract and the CWG's emerging proposal to assign the stewardship responsibility to ICANN, this will reduce the parties involved to two.</div><div><br></div><div>If there is not a line of business restriction placed on ICANN to prevent it also being the Root Zone Maintainer, there are two consequences:</div><div><br></div><div>- pressure that could emerge over time, from whatever source, for ICANN to develop another portfolio of activity that would divert attention, resources, focus from its core activity</div><div><br></div><div>- the concentration of the entire responsibility for operating the root in one entity.</div><div><br></div><div>I do not believe ICANN or the IANA functions department within it have the skills and experience, the resources and the need, to deliver the RZM functions.</div><div><br></div><div>I do not believe that them developing this capability is required by ICANN's core role.</div><div><br></div><div>Even if I could be persuaded on that point, the notion that we should go from three different entities with three different webs of constituency, degrees of power, and expertise (ICANN, NTIA and Verisign) to ONE, is inevitably and totally a future threat to the security and stability of the root.</div><div><br></div><div>It would be fundamentally irresponsible to allow such a situation to emerge, in my opinion.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>best,</div><div>Jordan</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Can anyone provide either a general answer or specific scenarios where the two-party solution is better.<br>
<br>
<br>
2.<br>
<br>
1.c.1 Says that we need to consider increasing robustness WITHIN IANA prior to the CWG proposal being submitted.<br>
<br>
1.c.2 Says we need to consider robustness everywhere (including within IANA) post transition.<br>
<br>
I am not aware of the justification for 1.c.1 other than it was sort of implied by the transfer of tasks from DT-D. But since NTIA did not refuse authorizations and there are no known problems, it is not clear that this is an urgent matter.<br>
<br>
Moreover I find it highly unlikely that a proper job of this could be done prior to transition if it occurs in 2015 or early 2016.<br>
<br>
Do we want to keep it?<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Alan</font></span><br>_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">Jordan Carter<br><br>Chief Executive <br><b>InternetNZ</b><br><br>04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)<br><a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a> <br>Skype: jordancarter<br><br><i>A better world through a better Internet </i><br><br></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>