[cooperation-wg] Update on IANA Oversight Discussions: ICG Meeting and IETF 90

Dear colleagues, 

In recent weeks, two significant community discussions regarding the transition of oversight of the IANA functions have taken place. 

The following summaries are provided as feedback to the RIPE community - an online version of these summaries, containing links to more detailed reports and information, is available at: 
https://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/industry-developments/update-on-iana-oversight-discussions-icg-meeting-and-ietf-90

Best regards,

Chris Buckridge
Senior External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

———

First Meeting of the ICG

The IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) held its first meeting in London on 17-18 July 2014. This group has been established to coordinate input from the various relevant communities and IANA stakeholders, moving towards development of a global transition plan. Discussions and outcomes of the meeting are documented on the ICANN website.

Adiel Akplogan and Paul Wilson, the CEOs of AFRINIC and APNIC respectively, took part in the meeting as representatives of the Number Resource Organization (NRO), and Hartmut Glaser, NRO Number Council member from the LACNIC region, represented the Address Supporting Organization (ASO).

In addition, Daniel Karrenberg, RIPE NCC Chief Scientist, participated as one of two representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC).

Key points from this meeting:

	• ICG members strongly asserted the group’s independence from ICANN.
	• The constructive atmosphere in the meeting resulted in the successful definition of a draft charter [PDF] and organisational principles for ICG.
	• The draft charter acknowledges that parts of the proposal will be developed in parallel across three main pillars (names, numbers and protocol parameters), coordinated by the respective operational communities.
	• The draft charter also makes it clear that the ICG does not expect to create substantive content in the proposals itself. Should serious further work be needed on the proposals, the ICG expects to send them back to the respective communities to do that work.
	• The group agreed to the request from the ICANN Government Advisory Committee (GAC) for five seats (rather than the proposed two).
	• The ICG recognised that there is a very tight schedule for developing a global proposal to the NTIA for transition of IANA oversight, and called on the various communities to produce input to a global proposal by the end of 2014.
	• There were around 100 remote observers for both days of the meeting. 
	• The next meeting of the ICG is being planned for 6 September 2014 in Istanbul, Turkey.
 

IETF 90 IANAPLAN BoF Session

On 24 July 2014, during the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) meeting in Toronto, a dedicated Birds-of-a-Feather (BoF) session was held to discuss the IANA oversight transition. Approximately 150 people participated on-site, with more participating remotely. The session was chaired by Andrew Sullivan and Marc Blanchet. Session materials, including minutes and presentations, are available from the IETF website.

Key points from this session:

	• Alissa Cooper reported on the first meeting of the ICG, and noted that the IETF community will take the lead in drafting a proposal regarding the protocol parameters.
	• Participants strongly supported the notion that the current arrangements (both contractual and operational) should not change significantly as a result of the transition process.
	• It was agreed that there should be reviews to ensure that:
		• Current procedures and relationships are sufficiently documented
		• The transition of oversight will not require significant changes of the current arrangements
	• In terms of IETF process, there was agreement that, while the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) should take a leading role, there should be a dedicated Working Group formed to act as sounding board and confirm rough consensus on the proposed transitioning plans. This working group could act as a focal point for other stakeholders to relay input back to the IETF.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2608 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/attachments/20140730/82c63a2b/attachment.p7s>