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

Andrew Dul andrew.dul at quark.net
Thu Oct 16 18:24:54 EDT 2014

While $800k certainly isn't a small amount of money it, I'll postulate
that it also isn't a huge amount. 

ICANN does a lot of "stuff" a lot of which isn't related to numbers at
all, but it does act as a lightening rod for lots of global issues.  Its
possible that an independent NRO would also have to deal with some of
those issues.  In that light perhaps we are getting the value out of our
relationship with ICANN?  ICANN certainly isn't perfect, but the working
relationship between the numbers community and ICANN, while odd, has
been highly functional and focused on specific issues where global
coordination is necessary.


On 10/16/2014 11:35 AM, Richard Hill wrote:
> Unless I am mistaken, the RIRs are paying something like US $ 800'000 per
> year to ICANN.
> I imnagine that the NROs could provide the IANA function for considerably
> less than that.
> Best,
> Richard
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Huberman [mailto:David.Huberman at microsoft.com]
>> Sent: jeudi, 16. octobre 2014 19:36
>> To: John Curran; rhill at hill-a.ch
>> Cc: iana-transition at arin.net
>> Subject: Re: [Iana-transition] What form of supervision is needed?
>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> Iana-transition mailing list
>> Iana-transition at arin.net
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-transition
> _______________________________________________
> Iana-transition mailing list
> Iana-transition at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-transition

More information about the Iana-transition mailing list