IANA Functions Stewardship Transition: Difference between revisions

Line 31:

==Initial Steps and Scoping of Work==

Following ICANN 49, ICANN published a "Draft Proposal, Based on Initial Community Feedback, of the Principles and Mechanisms and the Process to Develop a Proposal to Transition NTIA's Stewardship of the IANA Functions" for public comment in April 2014.<ref name="draft1">[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/draft-proposal-2014-04-08-en ICANN.org Archive - Draft Proposal of the Principles, Mechanisms, and Process to Develop a Proposal for the IANA Transition], April 8, 2014</ref> The proposal included a scoping document designed to focus discussion on what was expected of the process.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/iana-transition-scoping-08apr14-en.pdf IANA Transition Scoping Document], April 8, 2014 (PDF)</ref>

Following ICANN 49, ICANN published a "Draft Proposal, Based on Initial Community Feedback, of the Principles and Mechanisms and the Process to Develop a Proposal to Transition NTIA's Stewardship of the IANA Functions" for public comment in April 2014.<ref name="draft1">[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/draft-proposal-2014-04-08-en ICANN.org Archive - Draft Proposal of the Principles, Mechanisms, and Process to Develop a Proposal for the IANA Transition], April 8, 2014</ref> The proposal included a scoping document designed to focus discussion on what was expected of the process.<ref name="scope">[https://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/iana-transition-scoping-08apr14-en.pdf IANA Transition Scoping Document], April 8, 2014 (PDF)</ref> In a blog post following the publication of the draft proposal, Fadi Chehade applauded the ICANN community for its hard work and likened the upcoming transition to the removal of training wheels from a bicycle.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/training-wheels-off-11-4-2014-en ICANN.org Blog - Training Wheels Off], April 11, 2014</ref> Notably, Chehade singled out that the "U.S. Government, including the NTIA" had approved the scoping document, and that the scope was "consistent with the views of the leaders of various Internet organizations including the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Society and the Regional Internet Registries."

===Scope===

In addition to including the NTIA's "must-haves" from its March announcement, the scoping document presented a brief overview of the IANA functions and used that as the basis for defining the scope of the transition planning process:

<blockquote> The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions are a set of interdependent technical functions that enable the continued efficient operation of the Internet. The IANA functions include: (1) the coordination of the assignment of technical Internet protocol parameters; (2) the processing of change requests to the authoritative root zone file of the DNS and root key signing key (KSK) management; (3) the allocation of Internet numbering resources; and (4) other services related to the management of the ARPA and INT top-level domains (TLDs)... The dialogue and resulting proposal are to focus on defining accountability mechanisms that would serve to replace the current stewardship role played by NTIA to ensure ICANN’s performance of the IANA functions based on the agreements and/or policies provided by the respective bodies (IETF, GNSO, RIRs, ASO, ccTLDs, ccNSO).<ref name="scope" /></blockquote>

The scoping document also identified topics that had emerged during the ongoing community engagement process which, though important, were outside the scope of a process focused on developing a proposal for transition of stewardship of the IANA functions:

* Policy development related to the IANA functions;

* ICANN's current role as the IANA functions operator; and

* A range of issues related to the Internet, but not related to the IANA functions, including data privacy, cybersecurity, child protection, IP protection, the management of TLDs, or the review or reform of ICANN.<ref name="scope" />

The scoping document was the subject of some debate on the listserv after its publication. Many participants disagreed with the limitations on the scope of the conversation. [[Brenden Kuerbis]] and [[Milton Mueller]] posted an amended version in redline that broadened the scope of discussion, and in particular argued for a continued separation between ICANN and the performance of the IANA functions.<ref>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nYQwmfTB52fLwT88RpAyGd3kD69rBLXbnG5zi5IT9yw/edit Google Docs - Transition Proposal Scoping Document], last modified April 10, 2014</ref> When Chehade's "Training Wheels Off" blog post appeared, however, it appeared to some listserv participants that the scoping document was cast in stone.<ref name="ianalistserv" />

===Draft Proposal: Principles, Mechanisms, and Process===

Line 43:

Line 53:

| Web-based platform Utilize working group methods Organize dialogues Leverage existing information and processes Conduct stress tests Establish a clear and visible timeline Recognize discussion in other fora Make engagement platforms widely accessible Multilingual support Multiple comment & feedback fora

|}

Based on the recommendations and feedback received, ICANN proposed a steering group that would be composed of two representatives from each SO and AC, two representatives from "affected parties" IETF, IAB, ISOC, and NRO, a liaison from the ICANN Board, and a secretariat from ICANN staff to act as support to the group.<ref name="draft1" /> The steering group would be convened in time to convene for a first meeting at [[ICANN 50]]. During that meeting, the group would: elect a chair; finalize the group's charter; and establish processes and procedures for development of the transition proposal. Based on the experience of successful working groups, the draft identified three necessary elements of the development process:

Based on the recommendations and feedback received, ICANN proposed a steering group that would be composed of two representatives from each SO and AC, two representatives from "affected parties" [[IETF]], [[IAB]], [[ISOC]], and [[NRO]], a liaison from the ICANN Board, and a secretariat from ICANN staff to act as support to the group.<ref name="draft1" /> The steering group would be convened in time to convene for a first meeting at [[ICANN 50]]. During that meeting, the group would: elect a chair; finalize the group's charter; and establish processes and procedures for development of the transition proposal. Based on the experience of successful working groups, the draft identified three necessary elements of the development process:

* Provide adequate time for affected parties and other interested parties to identify and define necessary elements of the transition proposal, so that the steering group can effectively deliberate on all elements;

* "Appropriate" community outreach and input as the proposal is drafted; and

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 ==Initial Steps and Scoping of Work==
-Following ICANN 49, ICANN published a "Draft Proposal, Based on Initial Community Feedback, of the Principles and Mechanisms and the Process to Develop a Proposal to Transition NTIA's Stewardship of the IANA Functions" for public comment in April 2014.<ref name="draft1">[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/draft-proposal-2014-04-08-en ICANN.org Archive - Draft Proposal of the Principles, Mechanisms, and Process to Develop a Proposal for the IANA Transition], April 8, 2014</ref> The proposal included a scoping document designed to focus discussion on what was expected of the process.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/iana-transition-scoping-08apr14-en.pdf IANA Transition Scoping Document], April 8, 2014 (PDF)</ref>
+Following ICANN 49, ICANN published a "Draft Proposal, Based on Initial Community Feedback, of the Principles and Mechanisms and the Process to Develop a Proposal to Transition NTIA's Stewardship of the IANA Functions" for public comment in April 2014.<ref name="draft1">[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/draft-proposal-2014-04-08-en ICANN.org Archive - Draft Proposal of the Principles, Mechanisms, and Process to Develop a Proposal for the IANA Transition], April 8, 2014</ref> The proposal included a scoping document designed to focus discussion on what was expected of the process.<ref name="scope">[https://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/iana-transition-scoping-08apr14-en.pdf IANA Transition Scoping Document], April 8, 2014 (PDF)</ref> In a blog post following the publication of the draft proposal, Fadi Chehade applauded the ICANN community for its hard work and likened the upcoming transition to the removal of training wheels from a bicycle.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/training-wheels-off-11-4-2014-en ICANN.org Blog - Training Wheels Off], April 11, 2014</ref> Notably, Chehade singled out that the "U.S. Government, including the NTIA" had approved the scoping document, and that the scope was "consistent with the views of the leaders of various Internet organizations including the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Society and the Regional Internet Registries."
+===Scope===
+In addition to including the NTIA's "must-haves" from its March announcement, the scoping document presented a brief overview of the IANA functions and used that as the basis for defining the scope of the transition planning process:
+<blockquote> The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions are a set of interdependent technical functions that enable the continued efficient operation of the Internet. The IANA functions include: (1) the coordination of the assignment of technical Internet protocol parameters; (2) the processing of change requests to the authoritative root zone file of the DNS and root key signing key (KSK) management; (3) the allocation of Internet numbering resources; and (4) other services related to the management of the ARPA and INT top-level domains (TLDs)...<br />The dialogue and resulting proposal are to focus on defining accountability mechanisms that would serve to replace the current stewardship role played by NTIA to ensure ICANN’s performance of the IANA functions based on the agreements and/or policies provided by the respective bodies (IETF, GNSO, RIRs, ASO, ccTLDs, ccNSO).<ref name="scope" /></blockquote>
+The scoping document also identified topics that had emerged during the ongoing community engagement process which, though important, were outside the scope of a process focused on developing a proposal for transition of stewardship of the IANA functions:
+* Policy development related to the IANA functions;
+* ICANN's current role as the IANA functions operator; and
+* A range of issues related to the Internet, but not related to the IANA functions, including data privacy, cybersecurity, child protection, IP protection, the management of TLDs, or the review or reform of ICANN.<ref name="scope" />
+The scoping document was the subject of some debate on the listserv after its publication. Many participants disagreed with the limitations on the scope of the conversation. [[Brenden Kuerbis]] and [[Milton Mueller]] posted an amended version in redline that broadened the scope of discussion, and in particular argued for a continued separation between ICANN and the performance of the IANA functions.<ref>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nYQwmfTB52fLwT88RpAyGd3kD69rBLXbnG5zi5IT9yw/edit Google Docs - Transition Proposal Scoping Document], last modified April 10, 2014</ref> When Chehade's "Training Wheels Off" blog post appeared, however, it appeared to some listserv participants that the scoping document was cast in stone.<ref name="ianalistserv" />
 ===Draft Proposal: Principles, Mechanisms, and Process===
@@ Line 43: / Line 53: @@
 | Web-based platform<br />Utilize working group methods<br />Organize dialogues<br />Leverage existing information and processes<br />Conduct stress tests<br />Establish a clear and visible timeline<br />Recognize discussion in other fora<br />Make engagement platforms widely accessible<br />Multilingual support<br />Multiple comment & feedback fora<br />
 |}
-Based on the recommendations and feedback received, ICANN proposed a steering group that would be composed of two representatives from each SO and AC, two representatives from "affected parties" IETF, IAB, ISOC, and NRO, a liaison from the ICANN Board, and a secretariat from ICANN staff to act as support to the group.<ref name="draft1" /> The steering group would be convened in time to convene for a first meeting at [[ICANN 50]]. During that meeting, the group would: elect a chair; finalize the group's charter; and establish processes and procedures for development of the transition proposal. Based on the experience of successful working groups, the draft identified three necessary elements of the development process:
+Based on the recommendations and feedback received, ICANN proposed a steering group that would be composed of two representatives from each SO and AC, two representatives from "affected parties" [[IETF]], [[IAB]], [[ISOC]], and [[NRO]], a liaison from the ICANN Board, and a secretariat from ICANN staff to act as support to the group.<ref name="draft1" /> The steering group would be convened in time to convene for a first meeting at [[ICANN 50]]. During that meeting, the group would: elect a chair; finalize the group's charter; and establish processes and procedures for development of the transition proposal. Based on the experience of successful working groups, the draft identified three necessary elements of the development process:
 * Provide adequate time for affected parties and other interested parties to identify and define necessary elements of the transition proposal, so that the steering group can effectively deliberate on all elements;
 * "Appropriate" community outreach and input as the proposal is drafted; and