<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:153223265;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1645707768 104626840 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:54.0pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Greg,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">A number of us in DT-C were concerned about the CSC having a role in this and we ended with two alternative wordings:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:54.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<![if !supportLists]><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Cambria","serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span></i><![endif]><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Cambria","serif"">“In the event a change in IANA services is anticipated, the CSC is authorised to establish an ad hoc committee of technical and other experts to oversee the changes,
in accordance with a defined process.”</span></i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Cambria","serif""> or<i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:54.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<![if !supportLists]><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Cambria","serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">2.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span></i><![endif]><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Cambria","serif"">“The CSC, in consultation with registry operators, is authorised to discuss with the IANA ways to enhance the provision of IANA’s operational services to meet
changing technological environments; as a means to address performance issues; or other unforeseen circumstances. In the event it is agreed that a material change in IANA functions services or operations would be beneficial, the CSC reserves the right to call
for a community consultation and independent validation, to be convened by IANA, on the proposed change. Any recommended change must be approved by the ccNSO and RySG.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">As you will see, neither gives sole responsibility to the CSC. Both appear in annex G, both look to a wider engagement in discussions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">As others, I am not convinced that final decisions should be taken by the PTI, unless it was simply to adopt recommendations approved by the directly impacted
stakeholders and that had received good buy-in during the consultation process. Actual accountability needs to be somewhere and that would appear to me to be through the parent of the PTI – ie via the ICANN Board – given the model we are working on. There
are a number of groups whose agreement (as directly impacted) would be vital: IETF, IAB, ccNSO, RySG, and I’m sure many others, not just the two referenced!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">So CSC could initiate a process, PTI needs to be happy that due process has been followed and the decision has got good buy-in, but accountability – and therefore
final decision – would need to be at the ICANN Board level and subject to the various accountability processes over them (including review).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Martin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Greg Shatan<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 22 April 2015 07:16<br>
<b>To:</b> David Conrad<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Avri Doria; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CWG-Stewardship] For your review - version V3.3<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">This issue (who makes decisions about or approves "architectural changes to the root system" in the absence of the NTIA) bears further review. The CSC doesn't seem like the right place at
all. The PTI Board makes some sense, but only if we are not keeping it minimalist. Could the NTIA role simply disappear (as we propose to happen with the authorization/validation function)?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Greg<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:14 AM, David Conrad <<a href="mailto:david.conrad@icann.org" target="_blank">david.conrad@icann.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Avri,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Thanks for the clarification.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #B5C4DF 4.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">And I am not lumping them in with any policy decisions currently being made. In fact that is the crux of my question: where will these decisions be made? The
PTI Board? If so we should make sure it is reflected in the list.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">This is one of the things I've been a bit wound up about. I've called it "architectural changes to the root system".<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Currently,my view is that that decision is made by NTIA, using processes known only to them (but which, from empirical evidence would appear to include consultation
with technical experts at NIST and elsewhere). I had thought a logical place would be the CSC via the creation of an ad hoc, technically knowledgable committee, but I gather my assumptions of the role of the CSC were in error. Personally, I don't care too
much who makes the decision, just that the decision is made by folks who understand the issues and the process by which the decision is made is open, transparent, accountable, and well documented (and makes sense, of course).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">-drc<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>