11,770
edits
Changes
no edit summary
<div class="flexbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
<div class="flexbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
<h2 class="sectionheader2"><span style="margin:25px 0 0 15px">IANA Transition</span></h2>
<h2 class="sectionheader2"><span style="margin:25px 0 0 15px">IANA Transition</span></h2>
<div class="flexbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">In March 2014, the US Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced its intention to transition the oversight role of the IANA Functions to the global multistakeholder community on 30 September 2015 (later extended to 30 September 2016). The announcement asked ICANN to initiate a multistakeholder process to develop a proposal to be submitted to the NTIA for approval. The proposal requires broad support and follows the following principles:
<div class="primertextbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">In March 2014, the US Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced its intention to transition the oversight role of the IANA Functions to the global multistakeholder community on 30 September 2015 (later extended to 30 September 2016). The announcement asked ICANN to initiate a multistakeholder process to develop a proposal to be submitted to the NTIA for approval. The proposal requires broad support and follows the following principles:
*Support and enhance the multistakeholder model
*Support and enhance the multistakeholder model
*Maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet DNS
*Maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet DNS
<h2 class="sectionheader2"><span style="margin:25px 0 0 15px">Enhancing ICANN Accountability</span></h2>
<h2 class="sectionheader2"><span style="margin:25px 0 0 15px">Enhancing ICANN Accountability</span></h2>
<div class="flexbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">During initial discussions relating to the IANA Stewardship Transition, the ICANN community raised concerns about the impact that the transition would have on ICANN Accountability. In response, the Enhancing ICANN Accountability process was launched to develop a proposal, seeking to implement accountability measures that will hold ICANN accountable to the global stakeholder community in the absence of the “accountability backstop” provided by the historical contractual relationship with the U.S. Government. This proposal is the final piece of the IANA Transition puzzle and when submitted to the ICG will complete the proposal that the U.S. government asked for two years ago, in March 2014.
<div class="primertextbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">During initial discussions relating to the IANA Stewardship Transition, the ICANN community raised concerns about the impact that the transition would have on ICANN Accountability. In response, the Enhancing ICANN Accountability process was launched to develop a proposal, seeking to implement accountability measures that will hold ICANN accountable to the global stakeholder community in the absence of the “accountability backstop” provided by the historical contractual relationship with the U.S. Government. This proposal is the final piece of the IANA Transition puzzle and when submitted to the ICG will complete the proposal that the U.S. government asked for two years ago, in March 2014.
In December 2014, the CCWG-Accountability began working on the proposal to enhance ICANN Accountability. The process was divided into two Work Streams. Work Stream 1 is focused on accountability mechanisms that need to be in place prior to the transition. Work Stream 2 is focused on accountability measures that can be implemented post-transition. The CCWG identified four “building blocks” for the mechanisms that need to be in place pre-transition:
In December 2014, the CCWG-Accountability began working on the proposal to enhance ICANN Accountability. The process was divided into two Work Streams. Work Stream 1 is focused on accountability mechanisms that need to be in place prior to the transition. Work Stream 2 is focused on accountability measures that can be implemented post-transition. The CCWG identified four “building blocks” for the mechanisms that need to be in place pre-transition:
</div>
</div>
<h2 class="sectionheader2"><span style="margin:25px 0 0 15px">Next-Gen RDS</span></h2>
<h2 class="sectionheader2"><span style="margin:25px 0 0 15px">Next-Gen RDS</span></h2>
<div class="flexbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
<div class="primertextbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
WHOIS was created in the 1980s as a service to identify network operators on the Internet. Since this time, the Internet has changed far beyond expectations, evolving from a research network into a global commercial network that is integrated into everyday life. The usage of WHOIS has changed along with the evolution of the Internet, but the protocol has changed very little.
WHOIS was created in the 1980s as a service to identify network operators on the Internet. Since this time, the Internet has changed far beyond expectations, evolving from a research network into a global commercial network that is integrated into everyday life. The usage of WHOIS has changed along with the evolution of the Internet, but the protocol has changed very little.
</div>
</div>
<h2 class="sectionheader2"><span style="margin:25px 0 0 15px">Universal Acceptance</span></h2>
<h2 class="sectionheader2"><span style="margin:25px 0 0 15px">Universal Acceptance</span></h2>
<div class="flexbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
<div class="primertextbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
Universal Acceptance is the state in which all valid domains names are useable in all Internet enabled applications, devices, and systems regardless of length, script, or newness to the DNS.
Universal Acceptance is the state in which all valid domains names are useable in all Internet enabled applications, devices, and systems regardless of length, script, or newness to the DNS.