From jcurran at arin.net  Tue Mar  1 07:08:12 2016
From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:08:12 +0000
Subject: [Iana-transition] [NRO-IANAXFER] [CCWG-ACCT]
 CCWG-Accountability Delivers Report to Chartering Organizations
In-Reply-To: <61A6ACC3-3A9E-42F5-ABCA-ECBD5688C3A0@corp.arin.net>
References: <56CD1E49.2090102@nic.ad.jp>
	<61A6ACC3-3A9E-42F5-ABCA-ECBD5688C3A0@corp.arin.net>
Message-ID: <1BA6F37A-7564-440B-8B76-4DD874E61C2B@arin.net>

On Feb 23, 2016, at 10:21 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net<mailto:jcurran at arin.net>> wrote:

For those interested in the ongoing developments in the IANA Stewardship Transition planning
activities, it should be noted that the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN
Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) has provided its Chartering Organizations with its final
supplemental report on Work Stream 1 recommendations - see the attached message for details.

The ASO is one such chartering organization and the ASO liaisons are reviewing the final
report at this time, and shortly will make their recommendation.  Discussion regarding ASO
response to the draft will take place on the ianaxfer at nro.net<mailto:ianaxfer at nro.net> mailing list.

It also should be noted that the ASO has provided a minority statement for the
CCWG WS1 report ? the statement is not with regard to report content, but for
clarification of the number community?s expectations on the accountability
improvement implementation timeline, in light of the fact that this community
will be depending upon predominantly upon contractual measures contained
in the IANA Numbering services SLA rather the mechanisms recommended
in the CCWG WS1 report.   See the attached email from Izumi Okutani, who
leads the ASO liaison effort with the CCWG,  for additional information and
the text of the minority statement.

/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

===

From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp<mailto:izumi at nic.ad.jp>>
Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: [IANAxfer at apnic] ICANN Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal - Number, Community-Related Analysis
Date: February 29, 2016 at 11:00:33 PM EST
To: "ianaxfer at nro.net<mailto:ianaxfer at nro.net>" <ianaxfer at nro.net<mailto:ianaxfer at nro.net>>

Dear Colleagues,

FYI, I would like to share it here on the global list - while I trust this post has been shared or to be shared in respective RIR Mailing lists.

I would like to especially bring to your attention, the minority statement by the ASO to the CCWG's finalised proposal.
It is related to signing and implementation of the SLA on IANA Numbering Services, which ver.4 has been published on 25th Feb by NRO and shared on this list.

Note that our minority statement is not directly related to contents of the recommendations in the CCWG proposal.
However, we believe it is important to clarify our point as the minority statement, given the number resources community rely on our SLA to fulfill our expectations of ICANN accountability.
Below is a recap of what we have stated, including the time frame of signing of the SLA (also shared in the attached email under 3)).

?The ASO notes that the Internet Numbering Community is not relying on
the CCWG-ACCT WS1 proposal to fulfill our expectations of ICANN
accountability. Instead we will rely primarily on a contractual
agreement (or ?SLA?) between the RIRs and ICANN, as defined within the
CRISP and ICG proposals, to provide the required accountability mechanisms.

In order to serve this purpose, the proposed SLA must be in place at the
time of the IANA Transition. However, the agreement contains ?condition
precedent? language such that, even if it is signed immediately, it will
only come into effect when ICANN is actually released from its related
duties under the NTIA contract.

Negotiation of the Numbers Community SLA is nearly complete, and we
expect to reach agreement in the near future. We propose to then
promptly sign the agreed SLA with ICANN, in the same timeframe as
implementation of the CCWG recommendations. By having both components in
place at that time, we will be satisfied that all ICANN accountability
matters are properly resolved.?

In addition, in the IANA Stewardship Transition context, the ICG will secure confirmation from the CWG that its accountability requirements have been met, before sending this proposal to the NTIA via the ICANN Board: https://www.icann.org/stewardship


Regards,
Izumi

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20160301/ac0d58fd/attachment.html>

From ron.baione at yahoo.com  Thu Mar  3 23:47:31 2016
From: ron.baione at yahoo.com (Ron Baione)
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 20:47:31 -0800
Subject: [Iana-transition] U.S. Senate Letter to ICANN Chairman re: China
In-Reply-To: <61A6ACC3-3A9E-42F5-ABCA-ECBD5688C3A0@corp.arin.net>
Message-ID: <1457066851.48697.YahooMailMobile@web121906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

The Senate Letter to ICANN Chairman re China:


&quot;UNITED STATES SENATE
Sen. Ted Cruz Press Office
?
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Cruz Press Office: 202-228-7561
Rachael Slobodien: rachael_slobodien at cruz.senate.gov
Phil Novack: phil_novack at cruz.senate.gov
March 3, 2016
?
Cruz, Lankford, and Lee Raise New Concerns About ICANN?s Relationship with Authoritarian China
Senators send letter to ICANN Chairman Dr. Stephen Crocker
?
WASHINGTON, D.C. ? U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), James Lankford (R-Okla.), and Mike Lee (R-Utah) today sent a letter to Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Chairman Dr. Stephen Crocker, outlining new concerns that ICANN may have a direct operational relationship with the Chinese government and its potential implications for an Internet transition that ICANN is expected to approve in Morocco next week.
?
Today?s letter to Dr. Crocker follows a letter Cruz, Lankford, and Lee sent to ICANN?S CEO Fadi Chehad? last month. The letter to Mr. Chehad? stated serious concerns and requested information regarding his involvement with the World Internet Conference, organized by the Chinese government, a regime notorious for its censorship of the Internet and criminalization of forms of online speech.
?
?Last month, we sent you a letter stating our concerns regarding ICANN CEO Fadi Chehad??s participation in the Chinese-government-sponsored World Internet Conference,? the senators wrote today. ?Mr. Chehad??s participation resulted in an agreement to co-chair a high-level advisory committee for the conference, which could make ICANN complicit in the Chinese censorship regime. Since sending our letter, additional evidence has come to light suggesting that ICANN?s relationship with the Chinese government may be a systemic problem within the organization itself and not limited to a single individual.?
?
Read the latest letter from Sens. Cruz, Lankford, and Lee to ICANN officials in its entirety here and below:?
?
?
March 3, 2016
?
?
Dr. Stephen D. Crocker
Chairman of the Board of Directors
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 30
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
?
?
Dear Dr. Crocker,
?
Last month, we sent you a letter stating our concerns regarding ICANN CEO Fadi Chehad??s participation in the Chinese-government-sponsored World Internet Conference. Mr. Chehad??s participation resulted in an agreement to co-chair a high-level advisory committee for the conference, which could make ICANN complicit in the Chinese censorship regime. Since sending our letter, additional evidence has come to light suggesting that ICANN?s relationship with the Chinese government may be a systemic problem within the organization itself and not limited to a single individual.
?
A review of the past few years reveals that ICANN may have a direct operational relationship with the Chinese government. As you know, in April 2013, ICANN hosted its 46th public meeting in Beijing. According to your remarks, one of the hosts of ICANN?s meeting was Mr. Shang Bing, Vice Minister of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. As you must be aware, the Chinese government?s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) is not only a central component of China?s censorship regime, but it has pressured American companies such as IBM, Microsoft, and Apple to reveal their products? proprietary source code to ministry officials. Just recently, MIIT issued new regulations that will restrict foreign companies, including those based in the United States, from sharing digital content ranging from text to games to video.
?
Nevertheless, ICANN CEO Fadi Chehad? stated in his opening remarks, ?China is going to be a central part of where the Internet community, as we know it, is heading. And, therefore, in my clear discussions with the local responsible ministers, that from ICANN?s standpoint, engagement with China is not an option. It is not an option. If we do not engage with China at every level of our community, we, frankly, lose a part of our global legitimacy. We must and we will. And that?s why we?re here today.?
?
In addition, ICANN announced during the meeting that it would open its first global engagement office in Beijing, which would be undertaken by the China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC)?an organization that has not only helped implement Chinese censorship but is led by the Director of the Bureau of Telecommunications Regulation which is a part of MIIT.At the time of the announcement, Madame HU Qiheng, Honorary Chairman of CNNIC?s Steering Committee stated that the ?ICANN Engagement Center-Beijing would be not only a new link for ICANN to better develop and promote China&#39;s Internet community, but also a new platform for China&#39;s Internet community to better contribute to the development of the global Internet.??
?
The establishment of an official ICANN office in Beijing is extremely concerning and should have raised red flags within the United States Government. Especially considering CNNIC?s statement that it would ?invest necessary human and material resources in the construction of the center and actively carry out its functions including the coordination, communication, as well as operation in order to provide effective, long-term and stable services for ICANN to serve China?s Internet industry.?
?
To further put this decision into context, at the time of the announcement, Freedom House, an independent watchdog organization dedicated to the expansion of freedom and democracy around the world, ranked China in their report ?Freedom on the Net 2013? just above Iran and Cuba on Internet freedom. ?And since ICANN opened its Engagement Center in Beijing, China?s record on Internet freedom has declined and was ranked last in the world in 2015.?
?
The following year, in June 2014, just three months after the Obama Administration announced its intent to transition key Internet domain name functions away from United States oversight, ICANN held its 50th public meeting in London, England. During the meeting, ICANN invited Lu Wei, Minister of the Cyberspace Administration of China, to provide an address during the opening ceremony. According to his official resume, Lu Wei also serves as the vice chair of the Central Propaganda Department.? ?The Chinese government also announced in December 2014 that Lu Wei would become the new chairperson of CNNIC?the very organization that had claimed to be operating ICANN?s global engagement office in Beijing. Given Wei?s central role within the Chinese government, it is not surprising that he supports the Obama Administration?s plan to end United States Government oversight and further globalize ICANN.
?
Repeating a similar pattern to the 2013 meeting in Beijing, ICANN once again chose to further align itself with the Chinese government. ?During the London meeting, ICANN announced that it had signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the China Academy of Telecommunication Research (CATR), which is a unit of MIIT and is the official think tank of the Chinese government. ?In the announcement, ICANN CEO Fadi Chehad? stated, ?This marks another milestone in ICANN&#39;s globalization efforts after we established our first engagement center in Beijing last April?.This partnership is a testament to how China?a country with over one fifth of the global Internet population and a vibrant Internet industry?can engage and contribute in the ICANN global community.? ?A few of the stated objectives of the Memorandum of Understanding are to promote the Chinese community?s participation in ICANN, align academic and public research, and improve ICANN?s
 communication with Chinese communities and deepen the understanding of ICANN by the Chinese government, media and, industry.
?
This history leads us to a more recent issue that is currently under consideration by ICANN. XYZ.COMLLC (?XYZ?), a U.S. based registry operator, has submitted a Registry Services Evaluation Policy (RSEP) request to ICANN seeking approval to become the first foreign registry to operate within China. If ICANN?s Board of Directors approves this request, it will allow XYZ to become a complicit actor with China?s censorship regime.?
?
For example, XYZ will have to comply with Article 27 of Chinese Internet domain name regulations, China?s Constitution, and all other applicable laws, rules, and administrative regulations pertaining to Internet domain names. According to Article 27, any domain name registered or used by any organization or individual shall not include content that ?are against the basic principles prescribed in the Constitution; jeopardize national security, leak state secrets, intend to overturn the government or disrupt of state integrity; harm national honor and national interests; instigate hostility or discrimination between different nationalities, or disrupt the national solidarity; violate the state religion policies or propagate cult and feudal superstition; spread rumors, disturb public order or disrupt social stability; spread pornography, obscenity, gambling, violence, homicide, terror or instigate crimes; insult, libel against others and infringe other
 people?s legal rights and interests; or other contents prohibited in laws, rules and administrative regulations.?
?
Furthermore, XYZ will also have to comply with Article 34 and Article 35 of the Chinese Internet domain name regulations. Article 34 states that, ?[i]n case the domain name is in violation of the provisions and the relevant laws and regulations,? XYZ ?shall delete it and notify the domain name holder in written form.? Additionally, Article 35 states the requirement that ?Domain Name Registry and Domain Name Registrars have the obligation of conducting website inspection in concert with the national governing departments, and request to suspend or cease the resolution service of the domain name concerned.?
?
There is additional concern within ICANN?s Generic Names Supporting Organization (?Business Constituency?), the business constituency group which represents commercial users of the Internet within ICANN. The Business Constituency has raised concerns that aspects of XYZ?s RSEP are too vague and need additional clarification. For example, the term ?Chinese registrant? is too broad and could be interpreted to allow the extraterritorial application of Chinese censorship law to include residents of Hong Kong, a special administrative region within the People?s Republic of China. ?The Business Constituency also emphasized that ?government-sponsored censorship of domain names for political purposes undermines a stable Internet ecosystem that promotes end-user confidence as a safe place to conduct business. It also limits the free flow of data and information, on which business users of the Internet rely in delivering services to end users.?
?
We know that XYZ will comply with Chinese law. ?Indeed, it affirmed this commitment in its initial RSEP, which was filed with ICANN on October 9, 2015. Even though this RSEP was pulled at a later date, it described how a registry operator must comply with foreign laws. In the RSEP, XYZ stated, ?if we receive a specific notification that the registration of the name is illegal in China, we will treat it the same as we treat any notification from any other government that a registration is illegal. Specifically, we will cancel the registration pursuant to our anti-abuse policies which allow us to?cancel, ...any registration or transaction ... to comply with any applicable laws, government rules or requirements, requests of law enforcement, or any dispute resolution process.? This is identical to our current treatment of complaints from governments about illegal domain name registrations.?
?
It is deeply troubling that ICANN would put registry operators in a position of becoming an actor within the Chinese censorship regime. There is concern that this action could be an example of ICANN?s desire to build a close relationship with the Chinese government which could continue to move in a troubling direction once the United States Government ends its oversight. These concerns were recently confirmed by a member of the Non-Connected Party House?s (NCPH) Commercial Stakeholder Group who participated in a meeting with ICANN in February 2016 and stated, ?The ICANN board wants to engage more with China and India following the IANA transition, which somewhat explains the board?s decision not to take action against Chehad?.?
?
In order to gain a better understanding of the potential implications of ICANN?s relationship with the Chinese government and its impact on the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) transition, we request that you provide a response to the following questions as soon as possible, but no later than 9:00 a.m. on Friday, March 11, 2016.
?
1. ? ? ?Please state when you first learned that ICANN CEO Fadi Chehad? had agreed to co-chair a high-level advisory committee for the Chinese government?s state-sponsored World Internet Conference.?

a. ? ? ?Please provide a yes-or-no answer to the following question: Did you agree with Fadi Chehad??s decision to co-chair a high level advisory committee for the World Internet Conference?
?
b. ? ? ?Did ICANN?s Board of Directors approve of Fadi Chehad??s decision to co-chair a high level advisory committee for the World Internet Conference?
?
c. ? ? ? Did any member of ICANN?s Board of Directors ask Fadi Chehad? to step down from his position as CEO and President of ICANN?
?
d. ? ? ?Please provide the meeting minutes, attendance records, and all other documents associated with ICANN?s Board of Directors? meeting(s) with Fadi Chehad? in which his commitment to co-chair a high level advisory committee for the World Internet Conference was discussed.
?
2. ? ? ?Please provide a yes-or-no answer to the following question: It has been reported that ICANN?s Board of Directors took no action against Fadi Chehad? because ?[t]he view eventually prevailed that no reactive action should be taken lest China lose face.? Did ICANN refrain from taking action against Fadi Chehad? due to concern that China may lose face?
?
3. ? ? ?Fadi Chehad? has been called on to recuse himself from all discussions and negotiations pertaining to the IANA transition given a confirmed personal conflict of interest with the Chinese government. Has ICANN taken any action to ensure that Fadi Chade will recuse himself from the IANA transition? If no, please describe the reason for ICANN?s inaction.
?
4. ? ? ?During ICANN?s 46th public meeting in Beijing, Fadi Chehad? stated, ?China is going to be a central part of where the Internet community, as we know it, is heading. And, therefore, in my clear discussions with the local responsible ministers, that from ICANN?s standpoint, engagement with China is not an option. It is not an option. If we do not engage with China at every level of our community, we, frankly, lose a part of our global legitimacy. We must and we will. And that?s why we?re here today.? Do you agree with the statement that ICANN will lose part of its global legitimacy if it does not engage with China at every level of the community?
?
5. ? ? ?When ICANN announced it was opening its first global engagement office in Beijing, the China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC) stated that it would ?invest necessary human and material resources in the construction of the center and actively carry out its functions including the coordination, communication, as well as operation in order to provide effective, long-term and stable services for ICANN to serve China?s Internet industry.? Please provide yes-or-no answers to the following questions:
?
a. ? ? ?Did CNNIC invest human and material resources in the construction of ICANN?s global engagement office in Beijing?
?
b. ? ? ?Is CNNIC actively carrying out the functions, coordination, communication, or operation of ICANN?s global engagement office in Beijing?
?
c. ? ? ? Do any individuals associated with CNNIC or the Chinese government have a formal or informal role in ICANN?s global engagement office in Beijing?
?
6. ? ? ?ICANN currently lists the address for each hub office and engagement office on its website except for the engagement office in Beijing. Please provide the address of ICANN?s engagement office in Beijing.
?
7. ? ? ?When Lu Wei, Minister of the Cyberspace Administration of China and Incumbent Vice Minister of the Central Propaganda Department, assumed the role of the Chairperson of CNNIC in December 2014, did ICANN take any action to ensure that its global engagement office in Beijing was not being used to carry out censorship for the Chinese government?
?
8. ? ? ?Do you agree with the Business Constituency?s concern that the term ?Chinese registrant? in XYZ?s RSEP is too broad and could be interpreted to allow the extraterritorial application of Chinese censorship law to include residents of Hong Kong?
?
9. ? ? ?Do you agree that approval of XYZ?s RSEP will place XYZ in a position of having to comply with government-sponsored censorship of domain names for political purposes, which will undermine a stable Internet ecosystem?
?
10. ?A member of the Non-Connected Party House?s (NCPH) Commercial Stakeholder Group recently stated, ?The ICANN board wants to engage more with China and India following the IANA transition, which somewhat explains the board?s decision not to take action against Chehad?.?
?
a. ? ? ?Please describe ICANN?s plans for engagement with China following a potential IANA transition.
?
b. ? ? ?Did ICANN?s post IANA transition plans with China play any role in the decision not to take action against Fadi Chehad??
?
We appreciate your cooperation in this very important matter and look forward to your response at the stated date and time. ?Please contact Sean McLean (Senator Cruz), Sarah Seitz (Senator Lankford), and Christy Knese (Senator Lee) of our staffs if there are any questions regarding this request.
?
Sincerely,

[Signed by Senators Cruz, Lee and Lankford]
?

cc: Mr. Fadi Chehad?, Chief Executive Officer, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
?
The Honorable Lawrence E. Strickling, Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information, U.S. Department of Commerce
&quot;

Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20160303/30abbdea/attachment.html>

From john.sweeting at twcable.com  Fri Mar  4 09:07:21 2016
From: john.sweeting at twcable.com (Sweeting, John)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 14:07:21 +0000
Subject: [Iana-transition] FW: [NRO-IANAXFER] CRISP Team review of the
 Updated 4th Draft SLA for the IANA Numbering Services
In-Reply-To: <56D98FB1.4060708@nic.ad.jp>
References: <56D98FB1.4060708@nic.ad.jp>
Message-ID: <D2FF00BD.5C7BE%john.sweeting@twcable.com>

FYI

On 3/4/16, 8:37 AM, "ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net on behalf of Izumi Okutani"
<ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net on behalf of izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:

>Dear Colleagues,
>
>
>
>The CRISP Team has reviewed the Updated 4th Draft SLA for the IANA
>Numbering Services.
>
>Updated 4th Draft SLA for the IANA Numbering Services
>https://www.nro.net/news/updated-4th-draft-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-serv
>ices
>
>Firstly, we would like to thank both ICANN and RIRs for sharing all
>comments and updates on the SLA from its Third Draft in a continued
>transparent manner with Internet number community. It is our expectation
>that the completion of this SLA will continue to take place in such a
>transparent and open manner.
>
>We observe that the 4th Draft SLA is consistent with the number community
>proposal and we support the comments made by RIR staff in working towards
>a final SLA document, addressing the feedback received from ICANN.
>We have primarily reviewed whether the SLA sufficiently covers the
>following four key elements of the number community proposal.
>
>* Service level requirements of the IANA Numbering Services are clearly
>defined to meet the expectations of the RIRs and the Internet numbers
>community
>* The RIRs, and the Internet number Community through the Review
>Committee are able to conduct review of the service level, to ensure the
>service level is met in accordance with the SLA
>* The RIRs have the ability to terminate the SLA, while at the same time
>ensuring the stability of the IANA Numbering Services, in accordance with
>the number community proposal
>* The IPR and rights over data are transferred, in accordance with the
>number community proposal
>
>In particular, we support the NRO revisions numbered below, which are
>required to ensure consistency with the CRISP proposal. The previously
>proposed text, without the NRO revisions addressing ICANN's feedback,
>would be inconsistent with the number community proposal as well as the
>final ICG proposal, and therefore not acceptable to the Internet number
>community.
>
>https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/Draft-SLA_v3-comments-ICANN-2016022
>3.pdf
>
>Source 15: 8.1- Periodic Review
>Source 16: 8.2- Cooperation with review
>Source 17: 9- Failure to Perform
>Source 20: 10.3 Right not to renew
>Source 24: 11.1 - Submission of a plan  (* The RIR Lawyer Comment says
>11.2.1 - could it be a typo?)
>Source 35: 11.2 - Transition to Successor Operator
>Source 26: 12.1 - Assignment of IPR and rights to Data
>
>In addition, we wish to remind the community that the SLA provides the
>Internet number community with its required accountability measures,
>which are clearly represented within the number community proposal; and
>it is therefore essential to the CRISP support for the IANA transition
>plan.
>
>The SLA will have no effect until the transition actually takes place on
>30 September 2016, however it must be considered as an essential
>commitment along with other improvements to ICANN?s accountability. In
>particular the SLA should be executed or otherwise guaranteed, no later
>than the execution of changes to the ICANN Bylaws which have been
>specified by CCWG-accountability.
>
>The CRISP team wishes to express our concern about the lateness of the
>comments on the SLA made by ICANN, close to four months after the latest
>published version of the SLA by the RIRs.
>
>We would like to strongly request both ICANN and RIRs to work swiftly on
>providing additional inputs if any, so that the accountability measures
>needed for the Internet number community, can be put into place according
>to the schedule as described above. We trust that ICANN and RIRs continue
>to work constructively and transparently to finalise an SLA that respects
>the wishes of the number community.
>
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Izumi Okutani and Nurani Nimpuno
>on behalf of the CRISPT Team
>
>_______________________________________________
>ianaxfer mailing list
>ianaxfer at nro.net
>https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer


________________________________

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.


From john.sweeting at twcable.com  Fri Mar  4 14:12:43 2016
From: john.sweeting at twcable.com (Sweeting, John)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 19:12:43 +0000
Subject: [Iana-transition] FW: [Ianaplan] Session of possible interest at
	ICANN 55
In-Reply-To: <524A217B-3D20-4DB3-80FE-0AD7A91B4AEB@cooperw.in>
References: <524A217B-3D20-4DB3-80FE-0AD7A91B4AEB@cooperw.in>
Message-ID: <D2FF4840.5C87C%john.sweeting@twcable.com>

For those interested.....

On 3/4/16, 2:10 PM, "Ianaplan on behalf of Alissa Cooper" <ianaplan-bounces at ietf.org<mailto:ianaplan-bounces at ietf.org> on behalf of alissa at cooperw.in<mailto:alissa at cooperw.in>> wrote:

It is possible that the process of developing the ICANN accountability proposal will conclude during ICANN 55 next week. If it does, the ICANN Board may use its board meeting on March 10 to approve and send the transition proposal and the accountability proposal to NTIA. Remote participation will be available here: <https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/thu-board>.

Alissa

________________________________

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20160304/b3f54199/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00001.txt
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20160304/b3f54199/attachment.txt>

From jcurran at arin.net  Fri Mar 11 01:27:13 2016
From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 06:27:13 +0000
Subject: [Iana-transition] Plan to Transition Stewardship of Key Internet
 Functions Sent to the U.S. Government
In-Reply-To: <2DC10F7D-B850-4F22-AC5F-D7B39BDF9B50@arin.net>
References: <0.0.242.C5B.1D17B06B94B7A90.0@drone111.ral.icpbounce.com>
	<2DC10F7D-B850-4F22-AC5F-D7B39BDF9B50@arin.net>
Message-ID: <640CD627-A6A3-407C-8750-8C2783B44BCF@arin.net>

For those interested in developments with respect to the planning for stewardship
transition of IANA functions from the US Government to the community, it is worth
noting that all of the planning requirements have been met, and yesterday the
complete plan was submitted by the ICANN Board to NTIA for their consideration.

See attached press release for details.

Thank you,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

===



[ICANN]<http://www.icann.org/>
News Alert

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-03-10-en

________________________________
Plan to Transition Stewardship of Key Internet Functions Sent to the U.S. Government
Culmination of a Two-Year Effort by the Global Internet Community

10 March 2016

Marrakech, Morocco? Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Board Chair Dr. Stephen D. Crocker today submitted to the U.S. Government a plan developed by the international Internet community that, if approved, will lead to global stewardship of some key technical Internet functions.

"This plan is a testament to the hard work of the global Internet community and the strength of the multistakeholder model," said Crocker, who transmitted the plan on behalf of the global community. "The plan has now been sent to the U.S. Government for its review, and assuming it meets the necessary criteria, we will have reached an historic moment in the history of the Internet."

The plan provides a comprehensive package to transition the U.S. Government's stewardship of these technical functions, called the IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority), which are critical to the Internet's smooth operation. It also proposes ways to enhance ICANN's accountability as a fully independent organization. The transition is the final step in the long-anticipated privatization of the Internet's Domain Name System (DNS), first outlined when ICANN was incorporated in 1998.

The ICANN Board received the package from the community during its 55th public meeting in Morocco, and today transmitted it to the U.S. National Telecommunication and Information Administration (NTIA).

On 14 March 2014, NTIA announced its desire to transition its stewardship of the IANA functions to the global multistakeholder community. The package is the result of an inclusive, global discussion amongst representatives from government, large and small business, technical experts, civil society, researchers, academics and end users.

"The Internet community has exhibited remarkable dedication to the IANA stewardship transition because we know just how important it is to complete," said Alissa Cooper, Chair of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) that coordinated the development of the transition proposal. "Internet users the world over stand to benefit from its stability, security, and accountability enhancements to Internet governance once the proposal takes effect."

The global Internet community has worked tirelessly to develop a plan that meets NTIA's criteria, logging more than 600 meetings and calls, more than 32,000 mailing list exchanges and more than 800 working hours.

The package combines the technical requirements of a transition coordinated by the IANA Stewardship Transition Group (ICG) and enhancements to ICANN's accountability identified by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability). The two groups were composed of volunteers representing a broad range of interests from the wider multistakeholder Internet community.

"This plan enjoys the broadest possible support from this very diverse community and I'm confident it will meet NTIA's criteria," said Thomas Rickert, one of the CCWG-Accountability co-Chairs. "The work of this group shows just how well the inclusive multistakeholder approach is working."

The U.S. Government will now review the package to ensure that it meets NTIA's criteria. If approved, implementation of the plan is expected to be completed prior to the expiration of the contract between NTIA and ICANN in September 2016.

##

To see further comments (quotes) on the transmission of the package go here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-final-package-quotes [PDF, 46 KB]

To access the media contacts of Internet organizations involved, go here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-final-package-press-contacts [PDF, 284 KB]

To read the IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal, go here: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-transition-proposal-10mar16-en.pdf [PDF, 2.32 MB]

To read the Enhancing ICANN Accountability Final Report, go here: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-accountability-supp-proposal-work-stream-1-recs-23feb16-en.pdf [PDF, 6.03 MB]



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20160311/9e0ad00e/attachment.html>

From ron.baione at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 11 14:05:33 2016
From: ron.baione at yahoo.com (Ron Baione)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 11:05:33 -0800
Subject: [Iana-transition] Plan to Transition Stewardship of Key
	Internet Functions Sent to the U.S. Government
In-Reply-To: <640CD627-A6A3-407C-8750-8C2783B44BCF@arin.net>
Message-ID: <1457723133.29699.YahooMailMobile@web121904.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

I doubt at the US Congress will allow the transition to occur, not enough reforms to the whistleblower process were made to allow for ICANN members to alert the internet community of foreign government/other nefarious influence, in my opinion.  Right now, as I read the proposal, the internet community would be more likely to hear about nefarious influence of ICANN through a leak or from Edward Snowden than any trusted process.  

Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20160311/33c8d4f3/attachment.html>

From john.sweeting at twcable.com  Tue Mar 22 15:22:01 2016
From: john.sweeting at twcable.com (Sweeting, John)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 19:22:01 +0000
Subject: [Iana-transition] FW: [NRO-IANAXFER] CRISP Team Teleconference
 Wednesday March 23rd 2016 13:00 UTC
In-Reply-To: <D3171112.C1EB6%mabejuela@arin.net>
References: <D3171112.C1EB6%mabejuela@arin.net>
Message-ID: <D317138F.5D585%john.sweeting@twcable.com>

FYI

On 3/22/16, 3:18 PM, "ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net<mailto:ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net> on behalf of Michael Abejuela" <ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net<mailto:ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net> on behalf of mabejuela at arin.net<mailto:mabejuela at arin.net>> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

Find below an agenda and webex details for the next CRISP Team Teleconference.  You are invited to join as observers.


The agenda for tomorrow's call as well as Webex info is as follows:

1) ICANN55 Update and General Timelines
2) Congressional Hearing
3) SLA ver.5 review
4) Other Implemenetation Status
   a. IPR - Principal Terms
   b. Review Committee - Members
5) Reflection on the work completed overall


CRISP 2016

Wednesday, March 23, 2016 |    1:00 pm Greenwich Time (GMT)


Meeting number: 706 686 549
Meeting password: crisp

meeting link:
https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m0fd481c84ca42ec84567cf1a9328fc89


Audio connection:
0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK)
+44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK)

Global call-in numbers
https://ripencc.webex.com/cmp3000/webcomponents/widget/globalcallin/globalc<https://ripencc.webex.com/cmp3000/webcomponents/widget/globalcallin/globalcallin.dositeurl=ripencc&serviceType=MC&eventID=446021207&tollFree=1>allin.dositeurl=ripencc&serviceType=MC&eventID=446021207&tollFree=1<https://ripencc.webex.com/cmp3000/webcomponents/widget/globalcallin/globalcallin.dositeurl=ripencc&serviceType=MC&eventID=446021207&tollFree=1>

Show toll-free dialing restrictions
https://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf

Access code: 706 686 549




Call-in toll number (UK) +44-203-478-5289
Call-in toll-free number (UK) 0800-051-3810
Australia toll +61 29037 1692
Australia toll free 1800-658203
Austria toll +43 125 302 1542
Austria toll free 0800-297252
Belgium toll +32 2894 8317
Belgium toll free 0800-77651
Brazil toll free 0800-892-2411
Bulgaria toll free 00800-118-1100
Canada toll +1-416-915-9997
Canada toll free +1-855-818-5031
China North toll free 10800-714-1693
China South toll free 10800-140-1727
Croatia toll free 0800-223231
Czech Republic toll +420 2288 82827
Czech Republic toll free 800-701364
Denmark toll +45 3272 7723
Denmark toll free 8088-7006
Estonia toll free 800-0100348
Finland toll +358 931 584349
Finland toll free 0800-915086
France toll +33 17091 8646
France toll free 0800-9-19312
Germany toll +49-(0)6925511-4400
Germany toll free 0800-187-3683
Greece toll free 00800-1612-20-35535
Hong Kong toll +852 5808 1922
Hong Kong toll free 800-966347
Hungary toll +36 1700 8735
Hungary toll free 06-800-19550
Iceland toll free 800-9381
India toll free 000-800-100-8171
Indonesia toll free 001-803-016-3552
Ireland toll +353 152600 58
Ireland toll free 1-800-947178
Israel toll free 1-80-9453550
Italy toll +39 0230410 440
Italy toll free 800-870552
Japan toll +81 34580 8156
Japan toll free 0053-11-61212
Latvia toll free 800-04229
Lithuania toll free 8800-30854
Luxembourg toll +352 208 81750
Luxembourg toll free 800-27323
Malaysia toll free 1-800-815775
Mexico toll free 001-800514-5545
Morocco toll free (002-11-0011) 800-708-0263
Netherlands toll +31 20794 7996
Netherlands toll free 0800-022-3497
New Zealand toll +64 9929 1742
New Zealand toll free 0800-459104
Norway toll +47 2103-5854
Norway toll free 800-16930
Poland toll +48-22295-3597
Poland toll free 00-800-112-4312
Portugal toll free 8008-27739
Romania toll free 0800-895796
Russia toll +7 4952 217144
Russia toll free 88-00100-9439
Senegal toll free 800-708-0263
Singapore toll +65 3158 1415
Singapore toll free 800-101-2597
Slovakia toll free 0800-606-563
South Africa Toll +27 11019 7059
South Africa toll free 0800-983983
South Korea toll free 00798-14-203-3552
Spain toll +34 91791 1283
Spain toll free 900-93-7920
Sweden toll +46 85051 3563
Sweden toll free 020-79-7912
Switzerland toll +41 43456 9564
Switzerland toll free 0800-894627
Taiwan toll free 00-801-127320
Thailand toll free 001-800-156203-5535
USA/Canada toll +1 631 267 4890
USA/Canada toll free 1-855-299-5224



________________________________

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20160322/974dd5f6/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00001.txt
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20160322/974dd5f6/attachment.txt>