From memsvcs at arin.net Wed Oct 9 12:16:10 2002 From: memsvcs at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 12:16:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [nrr-blueprint] RIR Blueprint for Evolution and Reform of Internet Address Management Message-ID: The Regional Internet Registries (RIR) have published a document entitled, "RIR Blueprint for Evolution and Reform of Internet Address Management." This document is available at: http://www.arin.net/nrr-blueprint/ The RIRs have also sent this document to the Chair of the ICANN Board, the Chair of the ICANN Evolution and Reform Committee, and the ICANN President and CEO. The RIRs welcome feedback from the Internet addressing community on the contents of this document. To facilitate discussion focused on this document, a dedicated mailing list has been established and is open to all interested parties. Subscription information for the NRR-Blueprint mailing list is available at: http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/index.html All comments sent to the NRR-Blueprint mailing list will be publicly archived at the following location. http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/nrr-blueprint/index.html Raymond A. Plzak President & CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From billd at cait.wustl.edu Thu Oct 10 13:20:29 2002 From: billd at cait.wustl.edu (Bill Darte) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:20:29 -0500 Subject: [nrr-blueprint] RIR Blueprint for Reform Message-ID: Hello all, I have not fully digested the Blueprint document yet, but my first reading left me wishing the blueprint would have suggested the ICANN have an explicit role in interpretation and explanation of Number policy and operations to governments and those outside the explicit membership bodies of the RIRs as their role legitimately should be in review and interaction with the non-technical community.... political....IMO. Bill Darte ARIN AC CAIT, Washington University in St. Louis 314 935-7575 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gih at telstra.net Thu Oct 10 20:52:17 2002 From: gih at telstra.net (Geoff Huston) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:52:17 +1000 Subject: [nrr-blueprint] RIR Blueprint for Reform In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20021011100251.0208e5a0@localhost> Bill, Thanks for this comment. The underlying nature of the landscape here is that many parts of the world have undergone, or are in the process of implementation of, deregulation of many aspects of communications service provision. Accompanying this deregulation is the move towards an industry self-regulatory framework, where the stakeholders within a deregulated industry sector work together to determine the common conditions or applicable constraints that should be applied within the activity. Obviously most governments maintain various reserve powers, as well as powers of consumer protection, fair trading, etc, so these self-regulatory structures are not without a broader context of public policy. The RIRs, through the extensive use of the open policy process, believe that they maintain strong links with the stakeholders in this area of deregulated activity, and the so-called "bottom-up" nature of the open policy decision process used by the RIRs is a good example of the desired decision making framework in a deregulated industry sector. It has been the case in recent years that surveys of RIR membership have exposed the desire that the RIRs themselves take on a role of greater interface with governmental and semi-governmental entities within their region. The rationale here is not seeking any new format of regulatory imposition from governments, but more to be in a position to demonstrate to interested parties, including such public agencies, that the open self-regulatory process as used by the RIRs is effective in arriving at consensus outcomes that meet the requirements of all interested parties. As is evident in the RIR open policy process, the consideration of address-related policies often has a significant component that is not purely technical in nature, and the RIRs have been successful in engaging the broader set of interested communities within their open policy processes that has allowed these considerations to be aired and these perspectives to be included within the policy consensus process. From this perspective of the observation of the open RIR policy process as works today, its not immediately obvious to me that ICANN has a potential role in the interpretation and explanation of number policy and operations to governments as you propose in your comment. Rather than attempting to segment the set of interested parties into two blocks, those within the RIR community of interest and those within the ICANN community of interest, the RIRs see it as in the interests of effective, open and transparent policy development relating to the management of Internet number resources that all interested parties have the ability to directly participate in the RIR open policy development process. For this reason the Blueprint does not suggest that ICANN work within a constituency of public agencies and related governmental organizations at a public policy level and the RIRs work within a constituency of membership at a technical level..The Blueprint nominates a structure of delegation of operational responsibility and a delegation of the role of approval of common global RIR policies, and a continuing role for ICANN as one of assuring process integrity relating to these delegations, ensuring that the delegated functions are operated in a manner that is entirely conformant to the associated processes that are to be followed by the RIRs and the ASO. Kind regards, Geoff Huston (This is a personal comment) At 12:20 PM 10/10/2002 -0500, Bill Darte wrote: >"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"> >Hello all, > >I have not fully digested the Blueprint document yet, but my first reading >left me wishing the blueprint would have suggested the ICANN have an >explicit role in interpretation and explanation of Number policy and >operations to governments and those outside the explicit membership bodies >of the RIRs as their role legitimately should be in review and interaction >with the non-technical community.... political....IMO. > >Bill Darte >ARIN AC > >CAIT, Washington University in St. Louis >314 935-7575 From carsten at ripe.net Fri Oct 11 04:48:23 2002 From: carsten at ripe.net (Carsten Schiefner) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:48:23 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [nrr-blueprint] graphic interpretation of the NRR blueprint Message-ID: <200210110848.g9B8mNrx012268@birch.ripe.net> All, Alexander Svensson of icannchannel.de took the effort to sketch a graphic interpretation of the NRR blueprint: http://www.icannchannel.de/nrr01.pdf Best, Carsten Schiefner From carsten at ripe.net Tue Oct 29 05:58:49 2002 From: carsten at ripe.net (Carsten Schiefner) Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:58:49 +0100 Subject: [nrr-blueprint] ccTLD motion Message-ID: <3DBE69E9.139B82E8@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, FYI: the ccTLD constituency during its meeting in Shanghai passed a motion re. the RIRs response tgo the blueprint: --- Moved: Cubberly (.ca) seconded: Disspain (.au) THAT the meeting congratulates the RIRs on a clear logical and inclusive response to the reform issue, in direct response to ICANN's own dilemma, a solution which we wholeheartedly support. This motion is carried unanimously. --- Best, Carsten Schiefner