[DTL] Notes from DT-L Call on 8 April at 13:00 UTC
Graeme Bunton
gbunton at tucows.com
Thu Apr 9 00:57:43 UTC 2015
I'm going to agree here with Matthew,
I think that the process we are going through, given it's narrow focus
should provide reassurance.
Graeme
On 4/8/2015 6:09 PM, Matthew Shears wrote:
> Christopher
>
> I'm afraid that I continue to have great difficulty understanding why
> you think that what we are working on in DT-L is misplaced, naive or
> de-stabilizing.
>
> We are working on existing text in the current NTIA-ICANN contract -
> "C.7.3 Plan forTransition toSuccessorContractor"dating from 2014
> (attached) - text that is focused on ensuring that there is business
> continuity for the IANA functions should there be a need for moving
> (transitioning) the IANA functions to another contractor. We are not
> creating some new effort or activity - rather we are looking at
> something the current contract explicitly requires: "The current IANA
> Functions contract describes a number of functions, systems,processes
> and documents that would need to be transitioned from ICANN to
> asuccessor organization, should the Government select a successor
> contractor toperform the IANA Functions."
>
> We are not trying to anticipate that such a transition would or should
> occur. We are trying to ensure that were such a transition to occur
> there is - based on the existing contract requirement - a plan that
> allows for and encourages the continuity of the IANA functions. This
> is a far cry from de-stabilizing - indeed the purpose of this plan (as
> is clear in section C.7 of the current contract) is the opposite.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Matthew
>
> On 4/8/2015 10:21 PM, CW Lists wrote:
>> In which case the 'remit' and the DT-L interpretation of it, is at
>> best quite naive.
>> I maintain my postion. No. Such texts are at worst, deliberately
>> de-stabilising.
>>
>> CW
>>
>>
>> On 08 Apr 2015, at 22:41, Allan MacGillivray
>> <allan.macgillivray at cira.ca <mailto:allan.macgillivray at cira.ca>> wrote:
>>
>>> Christopher – the remit of DT L is limited to the design of the
>>> actual transition plan, not the processes or circumstances under
>>> which a decision to effect such a transition might be undertaken.
>>> On our call today, the DT L team acknowledged that given the time
>>> constraints that we are operating under, what we would produce might
>>> only really be seen to be a framework for such a transition plan and
>>> that it would need to be further elaborated in the future. The
>>> recommendation that you refer to ( 1., below) implicitly
>>> acknowledges this and goes on to recommend a deadline for
>>> completing such a detailed plan. The 24 months I chose was somewhat
>>> arbitrary, and was intended to recognize that one year might be too
>>> short, given all that will be going on. If you have another
>>> suggestion, it would be welcomed; the recommendations that I put out
>>> are intended to seek comments.
>>> Regards
>>> Allan
>>> *From:*CW Lists [mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu
>>> <http://christopherwilkinson.eu>]
>>> *Sent:*April-08-15 11:04 AM
>>> *To:*Allan MacGillivray
>>> *Cc:*dt4 at icann.org <mailto:dt4 at icann.org>; Jonathan Robinson; Lise Fuhr
>>> *Subject:*Re: [DTL] Notes from DT-L Call on 8 April at 13:00 UTC
>>> *Importance:*High
>>> So, on that basis you would give two years, only, for any interested
>>> parties to complain and make as much trouble as they like to force
>>> the issue of a 'transition'.
>>> To who? I can see the candidates lining up. Please bear in mind that
>>> there is a well established regulatory principle that control over
>>> critical infrastructure should not revert to dominant operators.
>>> I wish to be recorded as opposing the language that DT-L is proposing.
>>> CW
>>> On 08 Apr 2015, at 16:18, Allan MacGillivray
>>> <allan.macgillivray at cira.ca <mailto:allan.macgillivray at cira.ca>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Further to our call, this is what I propose for recommendations for DTL:
>>>
>>> DT-L Recommendations
>>>
>>> That:
>>>
>>> 1.the transition framework outlined in this document be further
>>> developed into a detailed, fully functional, transition plan within
>>> 24 months of the date of implementation of the overall IANA
>>> stewardship transition;
>>>
>>> 2.the budget for IANA operations be augmented with specific funding
>>> for the detailed transition plan development referred to in 1;
>>>
>>> 3.the process established for the potential transitioning of the
>>> IANA functions to an operator other than ICANN (the escalation
>>> process) specifically recognize that the detailed transition plan
>>> referred to in 1 must be in place before the commencement of the
>>> transitioning process, and
>>>
>>> 4.(KSK recommendations from Jaap/Guru)
>>>
>>> *From:*dt4-bounces at icann.org
>>> <mailto:dt4-bounces at icann.org>[mailto:dt4-bounces at icann.org
>>> <mailto:bounces at icann.org>]*On Behalf Of*Grace Abuhamad
>>> *Sent:*April-08-15 9:46 AM
>>> *To:*dt4 at icann.org <mailto:dt4 at icann.org>
>>> *Subject:*[DTL] Notes from DT-L Call on 8 April at 13:00 UTC
>>> Dear all,
>>> Notes from today’s call are below:
>>> *DT-L Call on 8 April at 13:00 UTC*
>>> *Google
>>> Doc*:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QRiXP9-nxM-h8FgJ_FyM962EwdjnRESrDT2jOtlRZZ0/edit?usp=sharing
>>> *Wiki
>>> page*:https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/DT-L+Transition+Plan
>>> *Members of DT-L include*:
>>> James Gannon -- apologies
>>> Guru Acharya
>>> Matthew Shears
>>> Christopher Wilkinson -- not in attendance
>>> Jaap Akkerhuis
>>> Allan MacGillivray
>>> Graeme Bunton
>>> *Notes*:
>>> Scale back ambitions for the time-being and focus on current
>>> transition plan plan.
>>> Suggestion to meet Friday's deadline is to:
>>>
>>> * use the template and evolve it based on the current transition plan;
>>> * elaborate on the high-level principles; and
>>> * look at other dependencies with DTs (and other communities)
>>> * elaborate a set of recommendations for how the plan should
>>> evolve post transition
>>>
>>> *Action*(Matthew): Capture David's comments on DT-L. Also will want
>>> to run this template by him tomorrow.
>>> *Dependencies with other DTs*:
>>> DT-O (Budget) will not be addressing budget costs for transition plan.
>>> DT-M (Escalation): one of their escalation steps may at some point
>>> be a RFP or separation, but the detail is not being addressed.
>>> Currently the escalation step relating to RFP says '6. Initiate RFP
>>> or [Process mechanism yet to be defined] [Pending Legal Advice &
>>> Fundamental Bylaw definition in CCWG]'
>>> --> DT-L could recommend a process for transition
>>> *Action*(Allan): draft recommendations for escalation related
>>> aspects (will circulate on mailing list)
>>> DT-N (Periodic Review) could also be related.
>>> *Things to note/edit in the document*:
>>> - Scaling back from original plan to write a new transition plan,
>>> and instead focusing on the current transition plan and additions to it
>>> - Have not received C.7.2 but submitted a DIDP request for it
>>> (submitted an received two other DIDP requests)
>>> *Action*(Jaap): draft text and recommendations for KSK rollover.
>>> *Action*(Guru): go over initial concerns (6 point in an email about
>>> the trasition plan) and see if addressed in draft.
>>> *Analysis of Transition Plan*:
>>> 'Document Structure' needs to refer to new proposal structure
>>> Transition Actions
>>> 'Deliverables not requiring transition' -- note the DIDP request for
>>> C.7.2
>>> At best, we'll have a framework for a transition. What DT-L produces
>>> can be taken to another level at a later point.
>>> *Deadline for edits to document in 24h. Aim for 13:00 UTC on 9
>>> April**. This way, Matthew will send text to David for
>>> review/feedback. *
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dt4 mailing list
>>> dt4 at icann.org <mailto:dt4 at icann.org>
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/dt4
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dt4 mailing list
>> dt4 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/dt4
>
> --
> Matthew Shears
> Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
> + 44 (0)771 247 2987
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dt4 mailing list
> dt4 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/dt4
--
_________________________
Graeme Bunton
Manager, Management Information Systems
Manager, Public Policy
Tucows Inc.
PH: 416 535 0123 ext 1634
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt4/attachments/20150408/023e951f/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the dt4
mailing list