[info ]Blog Update on IANA Stewardship Transition/Enhancing ICANN Accountability

Sun Dec 21 19:20:17 EET 2014

Hi everyone,

some reading here about IANA stewardship transition and ICANN accountability

Best,

Rafik

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org>
Date: 2014-12-20 4:26 GMT+09:00
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Blog Update on IANA Stewardship
Transition/Enhancing ICANN Accountability
To: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>

All,

Below is the latest blog update by Theresa Swinehart on the IANA
Stewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN Accountability tracks.

--

Link:
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/monthly-update-by-theresa-swinehart-3820ccd0-5c5c-43dc-a40f-9e74d6af3598

It’s hard to believe that 2014 is already coming to a close. This past year
has been monumental towards validating the strength of the multistakeholder
model, the true test beginning on March 14 with the announcement by NTIA of
its intention to transition its stewardship of the IANA functions. Now at
year’s end, I am very pleased with the effort the community has made to
inform and develop two global processes to achieve a successful transition.

To provide a broader picture of the groups involved in each process, we
designed an infographic showing the interrelation of the two processes and
the flow of proposals from each.  Please take time to review it.

[image: Description: HIJE-3446:Users:hillaryjett:Desktop:GAO Documents:IANA
Stewardship Transition:Interrelation between the Two Tracks Infographic.pdf]

Download here:
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-accountability-12dec14-en.pdf

Another great resource that has surfaced is a slide deck published by NTIA
<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/ntias_role_root_zone_management_12162014.pdf>
 that describes its current Administrator role in the Root Zone management.
To help inform transition discussions, the resource reiterates the
“clerical and administrative” role that NTIA holds in its oversight of the
IANA functions.

*IANA Stewardship Transition*

Three operational communities are in the homestretch towards meeting the
 January 15 target deadline to respond to the ICG Request for Transition
Proposals
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14-en.pdf>
.

The Names community Cross Community Working Group
<https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg> (CWG) met in Frankfurt
<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2014-11-20-en> at the end of
November, where constituent parts of the RFP were further developed. The
work of each sub-section was coordinated into a preliminary draft
transition proposal
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-naming-transition-01dec14-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 1.72 MB], which is currently up
<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-naming-transition-2014-12-01-en>for
public comment
<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-naming-transition-2014-12-01-en>
through
 December 22. Given the progress, the CWG has stated with reasonable
optimism that its proposal would be finished sufficiently close to
the ICG's target deadline.

Each of the five Regional Internet Registries communities has been discussing
transition proposals
<https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/Summary-of-RIR-proposals-updated-20141217.pdf>
at
RIR meetings, via mailing lists and through other forums. Each community
has selected three members to participate on a Consolidated RIR IANA
Stewardship Proposal Team
<https://www.nro.net/nro-and-internet-governance/iana-oversight/consolidated-rir-iana-stewardship-proposal-team-crisp-team>
(CRISP
Team) to coordinate a single proposal to submit to the ICG. The CRISP Team
acknowledged minor differences among the proposals outlined by each RIR,
but has since collaborated on accommodating these differences and is in the
final stages of developing a draft proposal
<https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/CRISP-IANA-PROPOSAL-Draft-16122014-clean.pdf>,
which should be published within the next few days.

Then following discussions at IETF 91 and through its public mailing list,
the chairs of the IANAPLAN WG
<http://www.ietf.org/iana-transition.html> representing
the protocol parameters community concluded that the working group had
reached sufficient consensus on a draft proposal
<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response/> to move
forward with a broader review. The draft proposal underwent an IETF-wide
last call review through mid-December, and is now in the hands of the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) for approval.

*Enhancing ICANN Accountability*

The CCWG-Accountability charter <https://community.icann.org/x/KYMHAw> has
been adopted by the GNSO, ALAC, ccNSO, GAC and ASO, and the working group
currently totals 150 with 26 members and 124 participants plus 30 mailing
list observers. Co-chaired by Mathieu Weill (ccNSO) and Thomas Rickert
(GNSO Council), the group has met twice already and will be meeting
<https://community.icann.org/x/NBDxAg> every Tuesday until ICANN 52 in
Singapore. The working group will also be holding one face-to-face meeting
in Frankfurt on 19-20 January.

Here is the CCWG-Accountability’s estimated timeline for completing its
work:

[image: Description: HIJE-3446:Users:hillaryjett:Desktop:Screen Shot
2014-12-17 at 12.54.37 PM.png]

In addition to the timeline, the CCWG has designated four sub-committees
<https://community.icann.org/x/XoMQAw> for organizing the vast amount of
research necessary to complete its work. Each work area has designated a
Coordinator, and members and participants are currently volunteering to
assist with the work. The four areas are:

·      *Work Area 1:* Review existing accountability mechanisms (including
ATRT 1 & ATRT 2 recommendations)

·      *Work Area 2:* Review input from the previous public comment period
and categorize items into Work Stream 1 and Work Stream 2

·      *Work Area 3:*  Review issues identified by the CWG-Stewardship

·      *Work Area 4:* Identify contingencies (especially in relation to
Work Stream 1)

I am very pleased to see that the group has developed effective working
methods and has become comfortable with the charter over a very short
period of time. This perseverance has enabled the group to work promptly
and cohesively and has put them on track for the timely development of
accountability recommendations for both Work Stream 1 and Work Stream 2.

Lastly, the Public Experts Group (PEG) has announced its selection of
Advisors to the CCWG <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-12-17-en>.
These Advisors will contribute research and advice to the working group,
and will bring perspectives on global best practices on various topics
ranging from Board Governance and Corporate Management to Global Ethics
Frameworks and Human Rights. It is hoped that this external expertise will
enrich the discussions of the working group and help to attain the level of
accountability necessary for the transition.

We encourage the community to stay informed and get involved in the various
discussions on each process. On behalf of ICANN and its community, I want
to extend my appreciation and gratitude to all of the volunteers who will
be working on these two processes through the upcoming holiday season.

In the meantime, continue to check the ICANN website
<https://www.icann.org/>, follow ICANN on Twitter
<https://twitter.com/ICANN>, or *like* ICANN on Facebook
<https://www.facebook.com/icannorg?ref=ts&fref=ts>, and for quick access to
all recent developments on both processes visit the transition homepage
here: https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability.

Happy holidays!

- TS

_______________________________________________
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://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141221/c7b9bb62/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: E0749ABA-4F41-4E05-8822-61E5A551F111.png
Type: image/png
Size: 51661 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141221/c7b9bb62/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 99284AC6-5E45-40E8-94F9-89B2AA38505F.png
Type: image/png
Size: 98233 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141221/c7b9bb62/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5097 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141221/c7b9bb62/attachment.bin>