[Iana-transition] lanic update, ideas for new oversight board (MONC)

David Huberman David.Huberman at microsoft.com
Fri Oct 31 08:20:46 EDT 2014


I took some time to think through your question. 

I think it makes sense that the NRO should have ultimate authority for the following functions:

a. manage the AS number space
b. manage the IPv4 address space
c. manage the IPv6 address space
d administer the in.addr-arpa and ip6.arpa domains

By "ultimate authority", that would previously have meant that the USGOV would dissolve the 
language within the MOU with ICANN previously referenced, and entered into a new MOU
with the NRO.

Does that sufficiently clarify my proposal?


David R Huberman
Microsoft Corporation
Principal, Global IP Addressing

From: John Curran <jcurran at arin.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 12:42 PM
To: David Huberman
Cc: iana-transition at arin.net
Subject: Re: [Iana-transition] lanic update, ideas for new oversight board (MONC)

On Oct 30, 2014, at 2:07 PM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:
> As someone who very much wants to see the addressing function taken away from ICANN and moved directly to the NRO, I'm not sure MONC is any more useful than the NRO self-governing.

David -

   Are you suggesting that the RIR community should be able to determine
   (via the NRO coordination function) the appropriate contractor to provide
   IANA operator services for the Internet Numbers Registry, i.e. that the
   IANA Stewardship transition plan should make that decision explicit, or
   are you proposing that the NRO should literally be the IANA operator?


John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the Iana-transition mailing list