[discuss] Problem definition 1, version 5

Grigori Saghyan gregor at arminco.com
Wed Jan 22 09:26:20 UTC 2014

Hash: SHA1

Grigori Saghyan
On 22.01.2014 7:37, George Sadowsky wrote:
> Purpose of this message
> To distribute version 5 of the problem statement.  Some minor
> wordsmithing has been done since version 4.   Do we have agreement,
> an can we proceed with this?
> Disclaimer
> I am a member of the Board of Directors of ICANN.  I believe that
> this affiliation is fairly well known.
> The opinions that I express on this list are my own.  I participate
> on this list in my individual capacity.  ICANN may or may not share
> the opinions that I express here.  I take no direction from ICANN
> regarding how I participate on this list, as well as on other lists
> focusing on Internet governance issues.
> I note that I have been involved in ICT activities for economic and
> social development since 1973, and in the training and use
> specifically of the Internet globally since 1991.  Both dates
> substantially precede the formation of ICANN.
> P1 (ver.5). US Government involvement in IANA root zone functions.
> 1. The Internet Assigned Names and Numbers Authority (IANA) has as
> one of its functions the vetting of changes in the Internet root
> zone file.  The members of the team that performs the IANA
> functions are employed by ICANN, the Internet Corporation for
> Assigned Names and Numbers.
> 2. ICANN has a zero-cost contract with the US government to perform
> the IANA functions. The US government authorizes changes made to
> the root zone by verifying that ICANN abides by publicly documented
> policies prior to the changes being submitted for implementation.
> 3. It has been a requirement for the contractor providing the IANA
> function to be a US organization, resulting in the provision of the
> IANA function being subject to US law and the decisions of the US
> judiciary.
> 4. Objections have been raised to US government involvement in this
> process on several grounds, including exclusivity and concerns of
> trust. Objections have equally been raised to movement of the
> function to several international organizations.
> 5. Acceptable solutions for assignment of the IANA root zone
> function should meet several criteria: (1) protection of the root
> zone from political or other improper interference; (2) integrity,
> stability, continuity, security and robustness of the
> administration of the root zone; (3) widespread trust by Internet
> users in the administration of this function; (4) support of a
> single unified root zone; and (5) agreement regarding an
> accountability mechanism for this function that is broadly accepted
> as being in the global public interest.
> 6. A number of potential solutions have been proposed; however,
> there has been no consensus that any of them are broadly
> acceptable.
> _______________________________________________ discuss mailing
> list discuss at 1net.org http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

- -- 
Grigori Saghyan
PGP Key ID: 0x48E4D5DC
Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/


More information about the discuss mailing list