Changes

<blockquote>...the [[in-addr.arpa|in-addr]] domains, which are used for people to map backwards from numbers to names, actually turn out to be pretty important for a lot of applications, and while they occupy a very small amount of the DNS namespace, they potentially have larger impact, if not available, on a wider scope. And so, people don't think about the RIRs when they think about DNS, but we have a slice that is required to be operational which we don't spend a lot of attention worrying about because we recognize there's an expert group doing that. And so, this is not a question of reporting, we actually have a wonderful relationship with IANA, and we actually have formal reporting that has been set up between the NRO acting as the Address Supporting Organization, and the IANA. We just want to make sure that the IANA has access to resources of expertise when making significant changes, becuase a mistake made in that organization would have wide-reaching impact.<ref name="seoulaudio" /></blockquote>  

<blockquote>...the [[in-addr.arpa|in-addr]] domains, which are used for people to map backwards from numbers to names, actually turn out to be pretty important for a lot of applications, and while they occupy a very small amount of the DNS namespace, they potentially have larger impact, if not available, on a wider scope. And so, people don't think about the RIRs when they think about DNS, but we have a slice that is required to be operational which we don't spend a lot of attention worrying about because we recognize there's an expert group doing that. And so, this is not a question of reporting, we actually have a wonderful relationship with IANA, and we actually have formal reporting that has been set up between the NRO acting as the Address Supporting Organization, and the IANA. We just want to make sure that the IANA has access to resources of expertise when making significant changes, becuase a mistake made in that organization would have wide-reaching impact.<ref name="seoulaudio" /></blockquote>  

Jeff Schmidt of JAS asked for clarification around what RIR's dependency was, and probed whether the dependency was in fact the proper operation of IANA, much as the rest of the Internet relies on a stable Internet. Curran demurred, pointing out that there were contractual obligations involved, and that ICANN's obligations to the RIRs were specific and narrowly focused on the stability and security of the DNS.<ref name="seoulaudio" />  

Jeff Schmidt of JAS asked for clarification around what RIR's dependency was, and probed whether the dependency was in fact the proper operation of IANA, much as the rest of the Internet relies on a stable Internet. Curran demurred, pointing out that there were contractual obligations involved, and that ICANN's obligations to the RIRs were specific and narrowly focused on the stability and security of the DNS.<ref name="seoulaudio" />  

[[Ram Mohan]] commented that increasing bureaucracy around the SSAC's investigations powers or its right to inquire would only impair the SSAC's ability to predict and assess threats. George Sadowsky agreed that it seemed "stupid" to impede the SSAC's work. Dennis Jennings responded that his opinion of the RWG conclusion empowers the SSAC to act. Mohan responded that every change requires SSAC to "write a note" to the Board to get permission to examine the ramifications of the change. Jennings noted the comment and stated that he was reasonably certain that the implementation of the recommendation as written would result in an acceptable working relationship. Dr. Crocker stated that the SSAC has an opportunity to put the mechanism to the test. He also noted that informal requests had failed in the past - a layer of bureaucracy and publication of requests might generate some leverage and build a record.<ref name="seoulaudio" />  

[[Ram Mohan]] commented that increasing bureaucracy around the SSAC's investigations powers or its right to inquire would only impair the SSAC's ability to predict and assess threats. George Sadowsky agreed that it seemed "stupid" to impede the SSAC's work. Dennis Jennings responded that his opinion of the RWG conclusion empowers the SSAC to act. Mohan responded that every change requires SSAC to "write a note" to the Board to get permission to examine the ramifications of the change. Jennings noted the comment and stated that he was reasonably certain that the implementation of the recommendation as written would result in an acceptable working relationship. Dr. Crocker stated that the SSAC has an opportunity to put the mechanism to the test. He also noted that informal requests had failed in the past - a layer of bureaucracy and publication of requests might generate some leverage and build a record.<ref name="seoulaudio" /> Jennings proposed that the RWG review the implementation in twelve months' time to see that it has had the desired effect. Jennings also invited Curran to submit a written comment.

Regional Internet Registries has not put resources into the IANA's security and stability, because we believed that

Noting that this was "the issue" of the review, Jeff Schmidt chimed in to state that "it is not the reviewer's position that these reviews of internal operations should not be done. Our issue was purely a governance issue." He noted that the IE report offered alternative processes, including having some security professionals on retainer to ICANN, to ensure that the security and stability of the massively important resource that was the Internet was preserved.<ref name="seoulaudio" />

==References==

==References==