[Internal-cg] Action item from ICG F2F

[Jari Arkko]

I had an action item from Singapore:

> 2. Arkko to do write up of jurisdiction and NTIA oversight in the Protocol parameters operational community.

The description for the action item is a bit brief, but my
understanding at the meeting was that we had two kinds
of questions for the IETF proposal, the first being ones that
the community needs to be asked about. We send one such
question to the IETF/RIR community. But the second type
was requests for further information that can be provided
by us or by reference to other, existing materials. These
are typically for clarification.

The way that I understood my task was that I was expected
to list these questions and provide a written answer, having
provided brief answers earlier in the discussion and in the
meeting.

However, this overlaps with the list that we already got
from Jennifer. The main items on my list were:

1. What is the situation with enhancements
to the agreements between IETF and ICANN? 

2. Can you explain what jurisdiction applies
for the IETF’s arrangements with regards
to IANA and ICANN?

3. Can you explain what oversight, if any,
NTIA currently has over the protocol
parameters?

I believe the latter two questions were already
in Jennifer’s table, and I don’t think we need to
do more. Does anyone think we need to do
more? I can write some additional text, but
if it is needed please point out what you would
like to see in that text.

In any case, the first question is not in Jennifer’s
list, and I would suggest adding it to the table:

1. What is the situation with enhancements
to the agreements between IETF and ICANN? 

Answer: The IETF and ICANN update the SLA on a
yearly basis. These updates typically specify things
that we have together identified as being useful
additional or changed procedures. For instance, in
the previous SLA in early 2014, a clause was added
for performing a 3rd party audit that policies are
correctly being followed when performing the IANA
function.

Most recent SLA can be found on the IETF web site
(http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/2014-ICANN-IETF-MoU-Supplemental-Agreement-Executed.pdf).

Now in 2015 the IETF and ICANN are again
updating the SLA and are currently in the 
process of negotiations. The responsible
party on the IETF side is the IAOC. IAOC’s
roles and structure is defined in RFC 4071
(http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4071.txt).

The parties will provide updates when there is
something to report. The IETF general
procedure is to keep the SLA as up
to date as the current view of IETF requirements
is, addressing needs that have come up
during the ongoing SLA period.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20150224/74713735/signature.asc>