[discuss] shifts in IANA/accountability discussion: your thoughts?

John Curran jcurran at istaff.org
Fri Jun 20 02:05:10 UTC 2014

On Jun 19, 2014, at 11:13 AM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

> Thanks Bertrand,
> this is very useful and helps indeed to frame the discussion. 
> One of my ideas is to use the model of the AoC Review Teams (as ATRT2) for building of something which could be called a multistakeholder "oversight body" over the IANA functions. 

Wolfgang - 
  You have several different roles being served by ICANN:

  - ICANN "The Coordinator of the Internet identifiers system"

  - ICANN-DNS "The DNS system policy development body"

  - ICANN-IANA "The administrator/maintainer of the IANA registries"

  If one were to draw diagram of role served by ICANN in each of the various 
  registries (DNS, IP addresses, other protocol parameters), it is quickly 
  apparent that ICANN has a different span for each:

  - IETF protocol parameters: ICANN is simply the registry administrator
  - IP addresses: ICANN provides an overall global framework, and it is
    global IP address pool administrator
  - DNS: ICANN (in one way or another) handles nearly all of it; framework, 
    policy development body, registry administrator

  The IANA is actually quite accountable today to both the IETF and 
  the RIR address communities for its administration of the respective 
  registries, so it is important to be clear about what oversight 
  you are proposing and what problem you are trying to fix.  If it 
  is to address potential failure of ICANN to serve the IETF or RIR 
  communities, then it's worth considering the existing accountability
  mechanisms before proposing new ones.  If it is with respect to DNS,
  then that is a different matter, but it is still probably easier to 
  make ICANN's DNS efforts demonstrably accountable to the DNS community 
  than it is to introduce a new "oversight body" to the ecosystem...


Disclaimer: my thoughts alone - each reader's perception of ICANN likely
            to vary depending on the particular portion encountered.


More information about the discuss mailing list