<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=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<base href="x-msg://68/"><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: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;}
/* 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.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.apple-tab-span
{mso-style-name:apple-tab-span;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle26
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle27
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></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">Chuck, comments in line below.<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>
<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""> Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 01 May 2015 14:37<br>
<b>To:</b> Martin Boyle; Milton L Mueller; 'CW Lists'; 'Grace Abuhamad'<br>
<b>Cc:</b> 'cwg-stewardship@icann.org'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [CWG-Stewardship] A few additional comments for … Two additional webinars on 6-7 May<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Martin/Milton,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Please note my understandings below.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Chuck<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<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""> Martin Boyle [<a href="mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk">mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, May 01, 2015 6:44 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Milton L Mueller; Gomes, Chuck; 'CW Lists'; 'Grace Abuhamad'<br>
<b>Cc:</b> 'cwg-stewardship@icann.org'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [CWG-Stewardship] A few additional comments for … Two additional webinars on 6-7 May<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Obviously then I’m misunderstanding something Milton.<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">> The IANA Functions operator (IFO) should simply take ICANN’s instructions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[Chuck Gomes] I think this is mostly accurate but I qualify that below.</span></i></b><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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Err, no! The IANA functions operator should base its decisions on agreed policy. In ccTLD cases, rfc1591 is now supplemented (informed) by the work of the
Framework of Interpretation Working Group. It also has advice from the GAC 2005 Principles. ICANN (as the Board) does not have a role in telling the IANA functions operator what to do in the case of ccTLD delegations or revocations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[Chuck Gomes] With regard to technical policy (i.e., Internet Standards), my understanding is that the IFO would check for compliance and does not need
specific direction from ICANN in that regard so I think Martin is correct that the IFO doesn’t rely on ICANN’s instructions for its technical checks. But with regard to ccTLD delegations or revocations, I believe that a Board approval is required. I do not
believe that the IFO is involved in any interpretation of ICANN policy; rather, ICANN staff confirms that ICANN policy has been followed. I know In the case of gTLDs, no Board action is needed for a delegation of a gTLD but ICANN staff confirms that GNSO
policy has been followed before it ever gets to IANA involvement; it is not the IFO responsibility to do that.
</span></i></b><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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:red">MB: I believe – and Chris Disspain has explained the role to the ccNSO and to others – the Board sees its role on delegations and revocations of ccTLDs as assessing
a traffic-light report from the IANA functions operator staff: it is essentially a process and documentation check, although it could be used to approve a decision where strict adherence to policy (eg on engagement with interested parties in countries where
this sort of approach is not carried out). In my mind it is not an instruction and the role could be done by a PTI Board which has responsibility for the provision of the IANA functions operator role.<o:p></o:p></span></b></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">This is fundamental – clear separation of policy and the IANA functions operator should not be undermined by ICANN giving instructions. And if I remember correctly
this principle is clearly embodied in the SOW. And ICANN does not have the power to overrule national due processes.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[Chuck Gomes] Agreed on the principle of separation policy development and the IFO and I think what I described in my previous comments above demonstrates
clear separation but I am pretty sure that ICANN staff must give confirmation (instructions) that ICANN policy (in contrast to technical policy) has been satisfied regarding delegations or revocations. And I do not think that violates the principle of separating
policy development from the IFO. I of course also agree that “</span></i></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">ICANN does not have the power to overrule national due processes<b><i>” but I don’t think that means
that the IFO would be involved in interpreting national due process; isn’t that ICANN’s task?</i></b><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"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:red">MB: For ccTLDs, I do not see where this role is performed. I’d also be alarmed at other ccTLDs (and hence non-nationals) having a say over a ccTLD.<o:p></o:p></span></b></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">> I don’t think the IFO should have discretion to make those decisions, it should simply edit the zone file as directed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[Chuck Gomes] I think this is a correct statement as I have tried to describe above.</span></i></b><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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:red">MB: The IANA functions operator’s role is surely (again for ccTLDs) to ascertain that the decision for change has properly been made (and all other decisions
can be automated anyway. But the disagreement is who does have the discretion to make those decisions.
<o:p></o:p></span></b></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">The issue – and hence the complexity – is about who actually has the right to make the decisions and direct the IANA functions operator. The role of the IANA
functions operator is to identify that a decision is appropriate – and the SOW gives some guidance to that, as does the work of the FOIWG. But it is absolutely not ICANN’s decision.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[Chuck Gomes] From a technical point of view I agree but not beyond that. We would be getting into a very different situation if the IFO has to make
decisions regarding whether ICANN policy or national due process is followed. That would mean that the IANA functions are much more than technical and clerical and it would require very different skills sets.</span></i></b><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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:red">MB: the IANA functions operator (and the current ICANN Board) role is
<u>not</u> to make the decision, but to verify that the decision is appropriate and correctly made.<o:p></o:p></span></b></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">Your failure to understand this is perhaps why you feel quite casual about re-bidding the IANA functions operation and I do not.
<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">The ccTLD community has seen the friction caused by ICANN imposing arbitrary conditions or questioning legitimate national decisions. (This history of this
high-handed approach was one of the motivations for the 2005 GAC Principles.) I do not think that I’m alone in wanting to avoid as much as possible having to start the learning process again with a new contractor.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[Chuck Gomes] I definitely do not think that ICANN should impose arbitrary conditions or question legitimate national decisions but I do not believe that
that means that the IFO should make those decisions. If we have disagreement on this, then I think we need to have some serious discussions so that we are all on the same page.</span></i></b><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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:red">MB: I am not arguing that the IANA functions operator makes the decisions. It is that the ICANN Board does not make decisions and give instructions.<o:p></o:p></span></b></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>
<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""> Milton L Mueller [<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mailto:mueller@syr.edu</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 30 April 2015 18:48<br>
<b>To:</b> Martin Boyle; 'Gomes, Chuck'; 'CW Lists'; 'Grace Abuhamad'<br>
<b>Cc:</b> 'cwg-stewardship@icann.org'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [CWG-Stewardship] A few additional comments for … Two additional webinars on 6-7 May<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Thanks for helping to highlight where you and I diverge, Milton. I’d take changing the operator a lot more seriously than you!
<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">MM:
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I don’t think we actually do diverge on this issue, Martin. See below.<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 whoever takes the IANA functions operator role will need to be aware of the back story and be able to command trust. It is not straight-forward and while
I am sure there’s a long list of people who would be able to update names, protocol parameters and the gTLD part of the TLD registries, I still struggle to think of who might be able to do the ccTLD piece
<i>and</i> would also be generally trusted. (Clue – it is not a TLD or a consortium of TLDs.)<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">MM: The IANA Functions operator (IFO) should simply take ICANN’s instructions. One benefit of a separated IFO would be the ability to more clearly separate
those sensitive policy decisions that should really be made by ICANN, and those implementations that should be done by the IFO. I agree with you that ccTLD redelegations can be more sensitive than gTLD delegations, I don’t think the IFO should have discretion
to make those decisions, it should simply edit the zone file as directed. Do you disagree?<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>
</div>
</body>
</html>