[bylaws-coord] question re bylaws implementation

[John Curran]

Becky - 

If we must take that approach, it should be a simple as possible while still being complete - 

	"facilities the development of global number registry policies by
         the affected community and other related tasks as agreed with 
         the RIRs.”

This would allow ICANN and the RIRs to continue to work together in the administration
of global number resources without requiring revisiting the bylaws as the specific tasks 
change.
 
/John 
 

> On Mar 24, 2016, at 1:28 PM, Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz> wrote:
> 
> Understood, but as you acknowledge, ICANN is currently serving as the IANA
> Numbersing Services Operator and, as the Mission is enumerated, ICANN
> cannot perform functions not included in its Mission.  How about this:
> 
> “facilities the development and, for so long as it serves as the IANA
> Numbering Services Operator, the implementation of related global number
> registry policies by the affected community as agreed with the RIRs."
> 
> 
> J. Beckwith Burr 
> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy
> General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
> Office: +1.202.533.2932  Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz
> <http://www.neustar.biz>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/24/16, 7:30 AM, "John Curran" <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 3/23/16, 6:33 PM, "Burr, Becky" <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz> wrote:
>>> In the draft Bylaws Final Proposal, we said ICANN ³facilitates the
>>> development of related global number registry policies by the affected
>>> community as agreed with the RIRs.²  ICANN wants to say that ICANN
>>> facilitates the development AND IMPLEMENTATION of those policies.  Is
>>> this
>>> ok??
>> 
>> Becky - 
>> 
>> No, this is not an acceptable addition - the original language proposed
>> is 
>> specific to the development of the global number registry policies
>> because
>> that is what is covered by the ICANN/ASO MOU.
>> 
>> ICANN does not have an inherent role (i.e. suitable for inclusion in its
>> mission) with regard to the _implementation_ of global number policies -
>> to the extent that it is performing that role today and in the future,
>> it is 
>> because it is and will be serving as the IANA Numbering Services
>> Operator. 
>> 
>> There exists the possibility at some future time that a different party
>> could 
>> be the IANA Numbering Services Operator, and in such a situation, ICANN
>> would continue to have an a role (as in the original mission language)
>> with
>> respect to facilitating _development_ of global number registry policies
>> (as
>> per the existing ICANN/ASO MOU), but it would not then be involved in the
>> implementation of global number registry policies.  As such, the proposed
>> change to add “and implementation" is not appropriate.
>> 
>> This response is provided after consultation with (and by unanimous
>> consent of) the executive committee of the ASO (aka NRO-EC).
>> 
>> /John
>> 
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> ARIN
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>