[Iana-transition] Scope of work

[Jason Schiller]

I see this work in various scopes of increasing size.

scope 1: documenting the metrics and putting them in a legal framework
scope 2: ensuring proper community over sight and modification of the
metrics.
scope 3: ensuring proper over sight of the IANA function (removal of
contract)
scope 4: ensuring proper over sight of ARIN
scope 5: ensuring proper over sight of the ICANN Board wrt ratification of
Global Policy Proposals
scope 6: ensuring proper over sight of ICANN

Scopes 1, 2 and 3 are required to transition the NTIA oversight.

To some extent 4 may be required if 2 and 3 depend on ARIN staff, or ARIN
board, or ARIN governance documentation, and not directly the membership.

Scopes 5 and 6 are not directly impacted by the transition of NTIA
oversight of the IANA function wrt number resources, but do relate to the
larger question of removal of the NTIA over sight of IACNN and the ability
of NTIA to pull the plug if things go wrong.

I would argue we should do the following:
1. quickly document the SLAs
2. propose a straw-man for who holds the legal contract including or
referencing the SLAs
3. document a process for modifying the SLA, transparently reporting of the
SLA performance to the community
4. propose a straw-man for declaring (non-)compliance, and the actions
taking up to and including removal of the contract
5. get community consensus on the straw-man for how holds the legal
contract, and what is the process for declaring (non-)compliance and taking
action.

Complete this by the end of the month.

Then while the CRIP team is working on unifying the outputs of the
communities, we should focus in on the increasing scope.

If the ARIN membership does not own the process for modifying the SLAs,
judging (non-)compliance, and taking action, then is there the proper
community oversight of those that do? (This needs to be complete prior to
the go/no-go decision of moving forward with the transition)

Then beyond that, does the ARIN membership have the proper oversight of
ARIN in general, such as changes to the ARIN mission statement, changes to
the ARIN bylaws, and recall of board members, etc.

Then beyond that, does the RIR membership have the proper oversight of the
ICANN Board wrt the ratification of Global Policy.  Are we comfortable with
the ability of the IACNN Board refusing to ratify a Global Policy and going
to arbitration?  Are we comfortable going to arbitration for every new
Global Policy Proposal?  Should there be some other ICANN Board oversight?
(we need to be comfortable with these answers prior to the go/no-go
decision of moving forward with the transition)

Then if we solve all those issues, we can look more generally into the
oversight of ICANN.


___Jason

-- 
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20141110/89b35663/attachment.html>