[CWG-Stewardship] NTIA- An Update on the IANA Transition

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hi Alan,

Unless there is another document/process to expect, I don't think the
proposal is entirely consistent with Section b (i and ii) of DT-F report
which specifically indicates what is expected of the agreement.

>From my readings, It seem the proposal attempts to address bii of DT-F
which means the RZM transition will be completed by/before stewardship
transition (all hopefully within next year). Doing that however will not
have addressed item b of DT-F which has to do with the agreement between
the Verisign and NTIA.

So I don't think we should say the proposal is generally consistent with
DT-F as IMO the agreement would be the major piece in the RZM transition.

Regards
Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
The proposal pointed to by the NTIA Blog entry (and by Milton's piece) is
an implementation of the recommendation of the CWG and DT-F. But carried to
an extreme. It allows the transition to occur  with no code changes and
virtually no changes in procedure other than those which will be well
tested prior to the transition.

I think that the temporary cloning of the entire RZMS is a rather extreme
measure to avoid making coding or operational changes at the moment of
transition, but it *IS* following the sound engineering practice of
minimizing concurrent changes, and specifically ones that cannot be fully
tested prior to the moment of transition. If it had been me, I would have
developed the revised code and used the cloned system to test THAT....

As far as I can tell, this proposal has nothing to do with the relationship
of the NTIA and Verisign and their cooperative agreement (other than
altering the mechanics of what is done under the agreement).

Alan

At 22/08/2015 10:36 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:

Hi,

Just to mention that Milton wrote an interesting blog post summary about
this proposal:

http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/08/18/whats-going-on-between-ntia-icann-and-verisign/

Inline with determining consistency with what DT-F proposed, it will be
good to ask the question of whether the proposal shared by Larry will
ultimately remove the administrative role NTIA. The current wording in the
proposal does not make that clear and I think that would indeed determine
if we are really done with stewardship transition or just scratching the
surface.

Regards
Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 18 Aug 2015 08:31, "Seun Ojedeji" <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com > wrote:
Hello,

Larry has just posted an update on the IANA transition and extension of
ICANN contract. An item of the update is the proposal that addresses the
administrative(middleman) role of NTIA in the update of the root. Although
the CWG did not address this in its proposal due to scope, it highlights
some high level principles (expectations) on this. It may be good to check
if the ICANN/Verisign proposal meets such expectations.

Regards


http://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2015/update-iana-transition

*An Update on the IANA Transition*
August 17, 2015 by Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information
and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling

The Internet’s global multistakeholder community has made tremendous
progress in its work to develop a proposal to transition the historic
stewardship role NTIA has played related to Internet’s domain name system
(DNS).

When we announced
<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition-key-internet-domain-name-functions>
our intent in March 2014 to complete the privatization of the DNS, we noted
that the base period of our contract with ICANN to perform technical
functions related to the DNS, known as the IANA functions, expired on
September 30, 2015. However, it has become increasingly apparent over the
last few months that the community needs time to complete its work, have
the plan reviewed by the U.S. Government and then implement it if it is
approved.

Accordingly, in May we asked the groups developing the transition documents
how long it would take to finish and implement their proposals.  After
factoring in time for public comment, U.S. Government evaluation and
implementation of the proposals, the community estimated it could take
until at least September 2016 to complete this process. In response to
their feedback, we informed Congress on Friday that we plan to extend our
IANA contract with ICANN for one year to September 30, 2016. Beyond 2016,
we have options to extend the contract for up to three additional years if
needed.

This one-year extension will provide the community with the time it needs
to finish its work. The groups are already far along in planning the IANA
transition and are currently taking comments on their IANA transition
proposals. As we indicated in a recent Federal Register notice
<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/fr_iana_transition_comment_notice_08102015.pdf>,
we encourage all interested stakeholders to engage and weigh in on the
proposals.

In preparation for the implementation phase of the IANA stewardship
transition, NTIA also asked Verisign and ICANN to submit a proposal
detailing how best to remove NTIA’s administrative role associated with
root zone management, which the groups working on the transition were not
asked to address. We asked Verisign and ICANN to submit a proposal
detailing how best to do this in a manner that maintains the security,
stability and resiliency of the DNS. Under the current root zone management
system, Verisign edits and distributes the root zone file after it has
received authorization to do so from NTIA. Verisign and ICANN have
developed a proposal
<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/root_zone_administrator_proposal-relatedtoiana_functionsste-final.pdf>
that outlines a technical plan and testing regime for phasing out the
largely clerical role NTIA currently plays in this process. The testing
will occur in a parallel environment that will not disrupt the current
operation of the root zone management system.

These developments will help ensure that the IANA transition will be done
in a manner that preserves the security and stability of the DNS.

Cheers!
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seun Ojedeji,
Federal University Oye-Ekiti
web:     http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
Mobile: +2348035233535 <http://??>
alt email: <http://goog_1872880453> seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng

The key to understanding is humility - my view !


_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150823/b9079510/attachment.html>