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

Thu Oct 16 20:15:27 EDT 2014

Sean,

I agree.  it is important that the IANA operators follow are the ones
generated by the agreement of the 5 RIRs through the GPDP.

I don't see how this IANA oversight transition would in any way affect the
way policy is created, or the process for providing advice on how that
policy is implemented by whomever performs the IANA function.

What may be at risk is judging the compliance of the IANA operators in
adhering to those policies.  I suspect there are some SLA metrics in an
NTIA/ICANN MoU/SoW/contract document, and that text will be moved into some
other agreement held be some other entity, who can take some action.  The
question is in what document should we put that text, and who is the
agreement between.

___Jason

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Just a clarification...  when you say
>> "what is however important for me is making sure that the RIR community
>> remains the ultimate source of allocation administration."
>>
>> Do you mean it is important that the policy that the IANA operators
>> follow are the ones generated by the agreement of the 5 RIRs through the
>> GPDP?
>>
>
> Exactly...and thanks for writing it better ;)
>
> Cheers!
>
>
>>
>> Or do you mean something else?
>>
>> ___Jason
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think there is a reason why its called Internet cooperation for
>>> assigned names and numbers (ICANN) ;)
>>>
>>> I personally have no problem with who keeps allocation records, what is
>>> however important for me is making sure that the RIR community remains the
>>> ultimate source of allocation administration. At the moment the RIRs
>>> are[1], making sure such status will not get repelled/daunted would be the
>>> ultimate goal.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>> 1. Although not in its entirety, considering the global policy
>>> development approval process.
>>>
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>> > ARIN
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:
>>> http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt
>>> email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
>>> <seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
>>>
>>> The key to understanding is humility - my view !
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Iana-transition mailing list
>>> Iana-transition at arin.net
>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-transition
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________________
>> Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:
> http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt
> email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
> <seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
>
> The key to understanding is humility - my view !
>
>
>

-- 
_______________________________________________________
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/20141016/3b3e0a56/attachment.html>