Re: [council] Draft conclusions of NC discussion on ICANN reform - scope

["J. Scott Evans" <jse@adamspat.com>]

Philip:

 

As requested, I am providing you my specific comments with regard to your report below:

 

I do not necessarily agree with the wording adopted for ICANN's mission.  I would suggest:

 

ICANN's mission is to coordinate technical and policy functions of the DNS in order to promote a safe, stable and commercially viable domain name system, promote competition, and achieve broad representation of global Internet communities.

 

Second, I would like to clearly state that while the NC agrees with the specific ICANN operations listed in the "What ICANN Does" paper, we realize that this is a non-exclusive list and that the ever-developing Internet will require ICANN to be flexible in the duties performs.  Guided by its broader mission statement, ICANN will need to add and subtract duties as the Internet continues to evolve and mature.

 

Lastly, I suggest that the first recommendation in your report be reworded as follows:

 

 Create clearly delineated divisions within ICANN responsible for the administration of its operational and policy functions.

 

My reasoning for this suggestion is that I am concerned that the current wording appears to give technical issues more importance than the policy issues and I believe these functions are inextricably intertwined.

 

I hope you will take my comments into consideration.

 

Regards.

 

J. Scott Evans

----- Original Message -----

From: Philip Sheppard

To: NC (list)

Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 8:33 AM

Subject: [council] Draft conclusions of NC discussion on ICANN reform - scope

Further to the minutes of the NC meeting, please find below draft conclusions and two proposed recommendations for the NC to consider. (Attached also are the terms of reference adopted by the NC 22 March). At this point the recommendations are intended to relate only to the scope and functions of ICANN. Further recommendations may follow future discussion. These recommendations attempt to reflect the broad view of the discussion on scope and pick up one concrete proposal made regarding the creation of separate divisions to handle specific technical functions. Comments please by e-mail in advance of the April 4 meeting.

Philip

-----------------------------------------------------------------

DRAFT

Scope and mission of ICANN

In broad terms the NC agreed with the factual description of ICANN's functions listed in "What ICANN Does" at: http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm
"ICANN is responsible for coordinating the Internet's naming, address allocation, and protocol parameter assignment systems. These systems enable globally unique and universally interoperable identifiers for the benefit of the Internet and its users.
ICANN's paramount concern is the stability of these services.
ICANN's role includes both operational and policymaking functions. "

The ICANN note specifies that ICANN's operations (in broad summary) cover:

1. General operational functions (such as IP address allocation, maintaining the DNS root zone file).
2. gTLD administrative functions (such as registrar accreditation, supervising the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy).
3. ccTLD administrative functions (such as requests for delegation and redelegation).
4. Policy coordination for infrastructure security.
5. Policymaking including:
  5.1. IP address and AS number allocation,

  5.2  ccTLD global policy coordination,

  5.3. Protocol numbering via the IANA registries,

  5.4 gTLD registry-level policies.

The Names Council specified the following existing functions of ICANN where the NC would like ICANN to do better in carrying them out:

- ccTLD administrative functions

- root server administration

- Registry and Registrar contract enforcement with respect to intellectual property and other existing conditions.

Recommendation 1: Create clearly delineated divisions within ICANN responsible for the administration of certain technical functions. This would free up top-level staff to address policy functions and leave administrative staff free to fulfil an explicit set of tasks.

 

The Names Council felt that the greatest danger of mission creep lay in the areas of security, consumer protection and the creation of infrastructure for at-large membership.

Recommendation 2. ICANN's mission should not be extended beyond that outlined in the note "What ICANN Does" .