[Iana-transition] What form of supervision is needed?

[David Huberman]

Regardless of any work that would need to be done, I support the idea of transitioning the traditional IANA addressing functions to the NRO. The IANA was run for decades as one person. The NRO can hire Leo Vegoda or someone else to perform that role. Funding can come directly from the NRO participants with no fee increase - just drop the significant money being paid to ICANN today.

Bottom line for me: ICANN is not the appropriate vehicle for the IANA function. We engineers need to take back control of the engineering functions of IANA, wresting it away from professional do-nothings and lawyers (save our own lawyers, who of course, we love).

David R Huberman
Microsoft Corporation
Principal, Global IP Addressing

________________________________________
From: iana-transition-bounces at arin.net <iana-transition-bounces at arin.net> on behalf of John Curran <jcurran at arin.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 10:06:17 AM
To: rhill at hill-a.ch
Cc: iana-transition at arin.net
Subject: Re: [Iana-transition] What form of supervision is needed?

On Oct 16, 2014, at 9:30 AM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:

> As far as I can tell, ICANN properly speaking does the following things with
> respect to IP addresses:
>
> 1. Approves the creation of new RIRs
> 2. Ratifies the policies approved by the RIRs
>
> And, through the IANA function, it does the following:
>
> 3. Allocates top-level IP address blocks to the RIRs
> 4. Publishes those allocations on its web site
>
> One could envisage transferring all those functions to the NRO, which would
> in effect mean that the RIRs would be supervising those functions.  Since
> the RIRs are responsible to their members, that would mean that the members
> of the RIRs would be supervising those functions.

Richard -

This is certainly possible, but it is worth noting that the NRO is a
rather lightweight coordination function among the RIRs, allowing the
RIRs to coordinate on matters such as "whether we'll have an joint RIR
trade show booth at a given international conference", "can we work on
one informational brochure on IPv4 runout/IPv6 rather than having five",
"can we have a single joint number resource statistics report", etc.

In these cases, each RIR is fulfilling each existing mission and operating
plans, only coordinating with other RIRs to do so in a more efficient and
consistent manner.  Ultimately, each RIR acts under its own authority on
matters which are primarily outreach and operational in nature.

Expanding the NRO to take on the functions listed could be done, but would
represent a fairly substantial change in the level of responsibility, and
may need to be accompanied by both organizational changes (e.g. actually
incorporating the NRO) and accountability changes (e.g. more than simply
to the RIR executive directors, as it is at present.)

If this approach were to be promoted, it would be good to have ample
discussion on this list first, including the aspects noted above.

/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN


_______________________________________________
Iana-transition mailing list
Iana-transition at arin.net
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-transition