<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">On Feb 27, 2014, at 7:32 PM, Ian Peter <<a href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a>> wrote:<br><div><br></div><div>Ian -</div><div><br></div><div> Very nice writeup... I have just a couple of comments, which you may use or </div><div> discard as desired.</div><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: Calibri;"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt; line-height: 13pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 13pt;"> </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 13pt;">ROADMAP</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-size: 12pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt; line-height: 13pt;"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </font><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">This roadmap
suggests that the IANA functions, though necessary processes in the secure and
authoritative functioning of the Internet, no longer need a separate entity and
would more productively merged with similar functions under the auspices of
ICANN. </font></p></div></div></div></blockquote><div>It is an interesting formulation of the problem statement... At present, I would describe </div><div>the IANA functions as "a set of tasks" rather than an "entity", and hence would instead</div><div>phrase the purpose of a roadmap as:</div><div><br></div><div>"This roadmap suggests that the IANA functions (which are necessary for the secure </div><div>and proper functioning of the Internet) that are currently administered by ICANN per</div><div>USG contract should remain at ICANN and be performed instead under its auspices </div><div>via the strengthening of accountability mechanisms to meet the global public interest."</div><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Calibri;"><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 10pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Subject of course to many concerns about details, this direction appears
to have widespread support from governments, civil society, technical community,
and private sector.</font></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 10pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </font><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">In order to
achieve this desired change efficiently and productively, the following roadmap
is proposed.</font></p><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; line-height: 13pt; text-indent: -18pt;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin"><span style="mso-list: ignore"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">1.</font><span style="FONT-FAMILY: ; LINE-HEIGHT: normal"><font face="Times New Roman"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 7pt">
</font></font></span></span></span><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">ICANN should be
requested to prepare a proposal for management of the previous IANA functions
within the ICANN multistakeholder model, bearing in mind the following
criteria:</font></div><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"></font> </p><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; line-height: 13pt;"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">(a) protection of the root zone from political or other
improper interference; </font></div></div></div></div></blockquote><br><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 13px;">The above criteria confuses me - are we referring to ICANN's DNS policy development role, </span></div><div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 13px;">or </span><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 13px;">performance of the IANA functions? The latter are technical tasks in registry administration</span></div><div><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 13px;">and the </span>most important criteria would be that ICANN continue to implement all IANA registry </div><div>functions in accordance with the respective policies (I guess one could further elaborate to </div><div>point out that operating per respective policies means free from political or other interference,</div><div>but that really is secondary to making sure that the IANA follows IETF protocol, RIR IP, and </div><div>ICANN DNS policies, both presently adopted and as revised in the future.)</div><div><br></div><div>That's it - thanks again for sending this!</div><div>/John</div><div><br></div><div>Disclaimer: My views alone.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 12pt;"><br></div><div style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 12pt;"><br></div></div></div></div><br></body></html>