NTIA's IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal Assessment Report

UPDATE June 9, 2016: POLITICO.com reports that despite today's NTIA report (see below), Congressman John Shimkus (author of the bipartisan DOTCOM Act), thinks his fellow Republicans will continue to push an appropriations rider that will prevent NTIA from going ahead with the IANA stewardship transition.

NTIA released its IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal Assessment Report today, June 09, 2016, (embedded in full below with all attachments, press release and fact sheet, NTIA Q&A), which in the words of one ICANN stakeholder:

"Conclusions seem favorable ... [t]hough we may have some issues on PTI to review."

According to Politico.com, NTIA is also directing ICANN to complete technical testing with Verisign to test making changes to root zone file. Verisign and ICANN are 60 days into the testing with no errors. NTIA has given ICANN until Aug. 12 to report back on progress, seven weeks before the U.S. government's current contract with the organization expires. "We will make an evaluation in early August as to whether or not any extension of that contract will be necessary," Strickling was quoted as saying.

Excerpts from NTIA's report:

"ACTION: NTIA recommends the respective communities and ICANN consider, if they have not already, additional processes by which to evaluate the Board and management of PTI in meeting any standards of conduct they deem necessary to guide ethical values and integrity in achieving their objectives."--NTIA report embedded below (p. 98 of 172). 

"While few organizations would find such an extremely complex framework attractive, it is well-suited to the unique nature of ICANN. The roles and processes identified by the CCWG Recommendations are not simple, but they are clear, and should provide for orderly decision-making processes at the Empowered Community level. The proposal contemplates that governance processes at the SO and AC level will be reviewed and enhanced in Work Stream 2 [after the IANA transition is finished]. This task is important, as the internal operations of these constituent parties will greatly impact the Empowered Community’s ability to function effectively and accountably." --NTIA report embedded below (p. 157 of 172) (emphasis added)

“Capture” Through Corruption. Recent events have shown that international organizations (especially those in the field of international sports) can be “captured” through corruption. Leading officials of such organizations have pleaded guilty to (or have been indicted for) accepting bribes to determine the location of international sporting events (such as the location of soccer’s World’s Cup). Correspondingly, it is at least imaginable that a government or a private actor could bribe the board of ICANN to vote the way it wishes on some hypothetical critical decision. Of course, this would have also been possible even under the existing structure of ICANN, as NTIA did not have any investigative machinery dedicated to detecting instances of bribery or corruption."--NTIA report embedded below (p. 170 of 172)

NTIA Press Release and Fact Sheet--NTIA Finds IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal Meets Criteria to Complete Privatization:


NTIA June 9, 2016 Compiled IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal Assessment Report (with attachments)--conclusion starts on page 25 (26 of 172):


NTIA Q&A:


References: IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal Assessment Report(pdf)

• Attachment 1: ICG/Names Proposal NTIA Criteria Assessment Chart
• Attachment 2: ICG/Numbers Proposal NTIA Criteria Assessment Chart
• Attachment 3: ICG/Protocol Parameters Proposal NTIA Criteria Assessment Chart
• Attachment 4: CCWG-Accountability Proposal NTIA Criteria Assessment Chart
• Attachment 5: COSO Assessment Chart
• Attachment 6: Corporate Governance Report
• Compiled IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal Assessment Report(with attachments)

See also on Domain Mondo: US Senator Ted Cruz: Delay IANA Transition, Save Internet Freedom

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

ICANN CCWG Accountability Proposal: CWG Legal Counsel Approval

Background: The Third Draft Proposal of the Cross Community Working Group to Enhance ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) is currently open for public comment until 21 Dec 2015 23:59 UTC, more info here. The ICANN [Domain] Names community's CWG-Stewardship proposal for the IANA stewardship transition has dependencies on the CCWG-Accountability final proposal.

"... the CWG Stewardship response to the ICG [IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group] is expressly conditioned on the CCWG Accountability proposal ... We [will] ... utilise the services of [independent legal counsel] Sidley Austin to confirm that the CCWG Accountability proposal does indeed meet the conditionality requirements of the CWG Stewardship....  in two stages: 1. Review the CCWG proposal put out for public comment and then submit confirmation to the public comment that the CCWG proposal does meet the CWG conditionality (if indeed it does) and 2. Confirm that the final proposal (to be prepared following the public comment period) continues to meet the CWG conditionality (if indeed it does). We believe that by working in this way, we will be able to A. Assist the CCWG by clearly communicating our position at the key stages. As we have done throughout the course of their work B. Assist the CCWG chartering organisations at key stages of their processes such that the they will be able to review the proposal and make their respective decisions with clear knowledge of the CWG position...." -- Lise Fuhr & Jonathan Robinson Co-chairs, CWG Stewardship, November 27, 2015 (emphasis added)

Independent Legal Counsel's response included in the proposed final version of the CWG comment letter posted December 20, 2015 (see conclusions below, emphasis added):

1. Community Empowerment Mechanism -- Conclusion – We believe that the community powers and community empowerment mechanism contemplated by the Third Draft Proposal adequately satisfy the CWG-Stewardship requirements relating to the community empowerment mechanism. Although the community powers are in some cases less direct than in the Sole Member model contemplated by the Second Draft Proposal, we believe the CWG-Stewardship requirements can be met through the community powers and community empowerment mechanism contemplated by the Third Draft Proposal. The CCWG-Accountability Third Draft Proposal requires that the community “follow the engagement and escalation processes described in the proposal before exercising any of the community powers.” This is a reasonable requirement but it creates a dependency on the usability of the engagement and escalation processes. If the community and in particular the SOs and ACs are unable to reasonably meet the requirements of those processes, then the community powers will lose their value. The very specific time requirements for various SO and AC actions in the escalation processes may be impossible or at best very difficult to meet; if more than one SO/AC cannot act within the tight time limits, the process will be halted. The CWG-Stewardship recognizes that the escalation processes need to happen in a timely manner but they must also allow sufficient time to accommodate the diverse and complex makeup of SOs and ACs. A key question that should be asked of SOs and ACs is this: what is the minimum time they need to respond to a critical issue that is also very time sensitive? To be more specific, can they respond in 7 days without compromising their bottom-up, multistakeholder model? If they cannot, then the CCWG-Accountability recommended empowerment mechanisms do not meet the CWG-Stewardship requirements. This should not be a hard problem to solve. Time restrictions that are deemed to be too short could be lengthened a little and/or the restrictions could be defined in a more flexible manner to allow for brief extensions when reasonably required.

2. ICANN Budget and IANA Functions Budget -- Conclusion – Similar to our conclusion in our response on the Second Draft Proposal, overall we believe that the Third Draft Proposal’s specifications with respect to the community power to reject budgets is both necessary and consistent with the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship final transition proposal; however, we require that the CCWG-Accountability proposal or the implementation process address the matters that are not sufficiently specified in the Third Draft Proposal (i.e., those relating to budget transparency, grounds for rejection of a budget/plan, timing of budget preparation and development of the caretaker budget, each of which were described in the Second Draft Proposal). In addition, we note, that the CWG-Stewardship (or a successor implementation group) is required to develop a proposed process for the IANA Functions Operations-specific budget review. We require that the proposal specifically acknowledge this.

3. IFR [IANA Function Review]-- Conclusion – We believe that the Third Draft Proposal adequately satisfies the CWG-Stewardship requirement relating to the IFR. The community’s ability to reject ICANN Board decisions on recommendations resulting from an IFR or Special IFR will meet the CWG-Stewardship requirements, provided that the final version of the CCWG-Accountability proposal provide that the right to reject can be exercised an unlimited number of times. 

4. Customer Standing Committee (CSC) -- Conclusion – We believe that the Third Draft Proposal adequately satisfies the CWG-Stewardship requirement relating to the CSC, provided that the ICANN Bylaw drafting process will continue to include involvement by the CWG-Stewardship (or a successor implementation group).

5. Post-Transition IANA (PTI) -- Conclusion – We believe that the Third Draft Proposal adequately satisfies the CWG-Stewardship requirement relating to PTI, provided that the ICANN Bylaw drafting process and related PTI governance documents will continue to include involvement by the CWG-Stewardship (or a successor implementation group).

6. Separation Process [future potential separation of IANA functions operator from ICANN] -- Conclusion – We believe that the Third Draft Proposal adequately satisfies the CWG-Stewardship requirements relating to the separation process. The community’s ability to reject ICANN Board decisions on Special IFR/SCWG recommendations, which would include the selection of a new IANA Functions Operator or any other separation process will meet the CWG-Stewardship requirements, provided that (i) the final version of the CCWG-Accountability proposal provide that the right to reject can be exercised an unlimited number of times, and (ii) the ICANN Bylaw drafting process and related the Separation Process will continue to include involvement by the CWG-Stewardship (or a successor implementation group).

7. Appeals Mechanism -- Conclusion – As we noted in our comment letter to the Second Draft Proposal, the Third Draft Proposal does not explicitly address the CWG-Stewardship requirement that an independent review process be available for claims relating to actions or inactions of PTI. This requirement could be addressed in a number of ways. For example, a provision could be added to the ICANN Bylaws that would require ICANN to enforce its rights under the ICANN-PTI Contract/Statement of Work (SOW), with a failure by ICANN to address a material breach by PTI under the contract being grounds for an IRP process by the Empowered Community (after engagement and escalation). Another approach would be to expand and modify, as appropriate, the IRP process currently contemplated by the Third Draft Proposal to cover claims relating to actions or inactions of PTI, with the ICANN Bylaws and PTI governance documents expressly confirming that the IRP process is binding on PTI (which provisions would be Fundamental Bylaws that could not be amended without community approval). Regardless of approach, the CWG-Stewardship requires that this dependency be addressed in the final CCWG-Accountability proposal in order for the CWG-Stewardship to confirm that the conditions of the CWG-Stewardship final transition proposal have been adequately addressed.

8. Fundamental Bylaws -- Conclusion – We believe that the Third Draft Proposal adequately satisfies the CWG-Stewardship requirements relating to Fundamental Bylaws.

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

ICANN Webinars Dec 2, CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal (slides)

Third UPDATE December 20, 2015: see on Domain Mondo: ICANN CCWG Accountability Proposal: CWG Legal Counsel Approval

Second UPDATE: CCWG-Accountability co-Chairs to Hold Additional Briefing Webinar on Draft Proposal of Work Stream 1 Recommendations on December 16 from 20:00-21:30 UTC (time zone converter here). Webinars will be conducted in English. Live interpretation services are available in Arabic, Chinese, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Russian. For Webinar details and how to attend go here.

UPDATE: Replay Webinars and transcripts available on CCWG Wiki. Other links:

• CCWG-Accountability - Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations - ICANN
• Survey form (use to submit your comment)
• Read the comments
• Comment period CLOSES 21 Dec 2015 23:59 UTC.
• Current Date/Time UTC:

Above: December 2 Webinar Slides

In order to brief the community on the contents of their Draft proposal, the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) will host two identical briefing webinars on Wednesday, 2 December at different times to facilitate participation across time zones. The webinars will take place on:

• 2 December from 11:00 – 12:30 UTC (time zone converter here) - 6AM EST (US)
• 2 December from 20:00 – 21:30 UTC (time zone converter here) - 3PM EST (US)

The webinars will be run online via Adobe Connect room (Strategic Initiatives Webinar).

If you are interested in attending the webinar but would like to receive phone dial-in details, please send an email to acct-staff@icann.org and indicate your language request (if needed). The webinars will be recorded and transcribed. Live interpretation will be made available in English, Spanish, French, Chinese, Arabic, Russian and Portuguese. More info here.

CCWG-Accountability - Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations now open for comments.  Comments close 21 Dec 2015 23:59 UTC. More information below and here.

Recommendations:

1. Establishing an Empowered Community for Enforcing Community Powers
2. Empowering the community through consensus: engage, escalate, enforce
3. Redefining ICANN's Bylaws as 'Standard Bylaws' and 'Fundamental Bylaws'
4. Ensuring community involvement in ICANN decision-making: seven new Community Powers
5. Changing aspects of ICANN's Mission, Commitments and Core Values
6. Reaffirming ICANN's Commitment to respect internationally recognized Human Rights as it carries out its mission
7. Strengthening ICANN's Independent Review Process
8. Fortifying ICANN's Request for Reconsideration Process
9. Incorporation of the Affirmation of Commitments
10. Enhancing the accountability of Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees
11. Board obligations with regards to Governmental Advisory Committee Advice (Stress Test 18)
12. Committing to further accountability work in Work Stream 2

Current Status: The CCWG-Accountability seeks community feedback on its Draft Proposal. You are invited to indicate your support for recommendations (see above) using the survey the CCWG-Accountability put together to facilitate submission of your comments--survey form located here. The questions align with each recommendation contained in the Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations. Each proposal contains one question designed to determine whether the broad community supports the recommended enhancements as well as a comment box to capture feedback for each proposed change. In addition, a box for any additional input, including on broader topics e.g. Stress Tests, compliance with NTIA criteria and CWG-Stewardship requirements is included in the survey.

Next Steps: Each of the Chartering Organizations shall, in accordance with their own rules and procedures, review and discuss the Draft Proposal(s) and decide whether to adopt the recommendations contained in it. The Chairs of the Chartering Organizations shall notify the Co-Chairs of the WG of the result of the deliberations as soon as feasible.

After synthesis of the comments received, and assuming no major changes, the group currently projects submission of Work Stream 1 Recommendations to the ICANN Board in late January 2016. 

Source of the above: ICANN CCWG-Accountability, icann.org.

Addendum:
Charter - Enhancing ICANN Accountability - 6 Chartering Organizations and their members on CCWG-Accountability:

ALAC
Sebastien Bachollet (Europe)
Tijani Ben Jemaa (Africa)
Alan Greenberg (North America)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (Asia/Asia Pacific)
León Sanchez (Latin America) – Co-Chair

ASO
Fiona Asonga
Athina Fragkouli
Izumi Okutani
Jorge Villa

ccNSO
Jordan Carter (.NZ, AP Region)
Eberhard Lisse (.NA, African Region)
Roelof Meijer (.NL, European Region)
Giovanni Seppia (.EU, European Region)
Mathieu Weill (.FR, European Region) – Co-Chair

GAC
Par Brumark (Niue)
Olga Cavalli (Agentina)
Alice Munyua (African Union Commission)
Suzanne Radell (USA)
Julia Wolman (Denmark)

GNSO
James Bladel (RrSG, North America Region)
Becky Burr (RySG, North America Region)
Steve DelBianco (CSG, North America Region)
Robin Gross (NCSG, North America Region)
Thomas Rickert (GNSO Council, Europe Region) – Co-Chair

SSAC
Lyman Chapin
Julie Hammer

See also on Domain Mondo: IANA, ICANN Accountability, CCWG Crunch Time! Midnight Deadlines!

[Disclosure: John Poole, Editor of Domain Mondo, has already submitted his comment (via the survey form), supporting all 12 recommendations. His comment may be reviewed here (pdf).]

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

NTIA Vetoes Compromise Proposal on GAC Advice to ICANN Board

Above right: Stress Test 18 "Compromise proposal" under consideration by CCWG-Accountability 23 Nov 2015

In a "last minute" move by the US Government (US Department of Commerce's NTIA), the "Compromise Proposal" (see above) under consideration by CCWG-Accountability (Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability, which is part of the total IANA Stewardship Transition process announced March, 2014, by NTIA), dealing with ST18--GAC advice to the ICANN Board--was effectively vetoed via email sent to the CCWG mail list on November 25, 2015 (emphasis and links added):

"Hello everyone, Assistant Secretary Strickling has asked that I share this with the CCWG.  Best regards, Suz (Suzanne Radell of NTIA, US Department of Commerce).

"NTIA Statement on Stress Test 18, November 25, 2015

"NTIA has been closely following the discussions in the CCWG-Accountability, including the recently concluded small group on stress test 18.  As has been the case throughout the work of the CCWG, we are impressed by the time and dedication so many of you are putting into these important discussions.  We thank everyone for their efforts as the group works to finalize the proposal for publication on November 30. 

"NTIA has long believed that governments, like all stakeholders, have an important role to play within multistakeholder processes, including ICANN.  Our position on that has not changed.  As the CCWG finalizes its proposals for enhancing ICANN’s accountability, we feel we should reiterate our view, as we stated last July, that ICANN preserve and clarify the current practice of the Board  in responding to advice it receives from the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). Specifically, ICANN should amend its Bylaws to clarify that the Board is required to enter into a formal consultation process with the GAC only where it receives GAC advice that is consensus advice based on the current definition within the GAC’s Operating Principles, that is, advice to which no GAC member has raised a formal objection. 

"We want to make clear that nothing about this proposal is intended to limit how the GAC determines what advice it submits to the Board.  As the Bylaws make clear, the Board is obligated to duly take all GAC advice into account.  However, it is not practicable for the Board to give GAC advice special consideration unless it is consensus advice as currently defined in the GAC Operating Principles.  Anything less than consensus places the Board in the awkward, if not impossible, position of trying to choose between governments with conflicting opinions.  NTIA sees any deviation from the current standard of consensus as introducing instability into the system while also inadvertently diminishing the important role of governments.  Accordingly, every time the GAC provides consensus advice that it expects to trigger the special Bylaws consideration from the Board, it must be unambiguous and consistent with the current definition in the Operating Principles.  Asking the Board to interpret any other threshold of support seems counter to the spirit of the CCWG’s efforts to empower the community in a clear and consistent manner.  It also undermines the work done to implement the relevant recommendations of ATRT1 to fix what the community diagnosed as a dysfunctional Board-GAC relationship.

"We are aware that some countries are concerned that the current GAC Operating Principles could lead to a single-country veto of GAC advice to the detriment of other countries.  We too share that concern.  But the right place to deal with that issue is not at the last minute in the CCWG but in a more reasoned and full discussion of this issue within the GAC.  NTIA stands ready to participate in and contribute to such a discussion to resolve that concern at the appropriate time and place."

Reactions from CCWG members and participants included the following:

As long as we do as we are told, I am sure we can achieve a result that  is acceptable to NTIA. What is obvious to me now, is that not only did the NTIA want a solution that was not dominated by governments, a goal I strongly agree with, they also did not want a solution where the GAC stands with equal footing as a stakeholder, which makes me uneasy. But we can be thankful, at least we now know what we must do if we want approval. Before now there was ambiguity because as long as the  solution did not give government primacy I thought we would be ok. Now I realize we can't even have equality. This is not disarray but well ordered.  We had one serious issue pending and now that has been taken off the table. We can expect that GAC will not be able to approve of the accountability proposal as I expect that [there] will be at least one [or] more member[s] of the GAC disappointed enough to formally object to the solution as constrained by NTIA. So as long as the solution is acceptable to all the SOs and to ALAC, ... [we’ll] still be ok with the latest NTIA condition, we should be successful at reaching the end of the discussion.  We also have a good indication of the power of NTIA over ICANN as a  backstop for any who doubted that power.  Anytime the US speaks, ICANN jumps. We should rejoice and be thankful as we have less to decide upon. -- Avri Doria, active stakeholder in ICANN and GNSO since 2005, recipient of the ICANN Multistakeholder Ethos Award (given for the first time at ICANN 50, June 2014); also active in IGF, IETF, ISOC, and other groups.

CCWG-Accountability met on Thanksgiving morning, November 26, 2015 (UTC 14:00). Notes, transcript, and recording may be found on the wiki page. The provisions now dealing with ST18 are summarized here. The CCWG-Accountability third draft proposal is scheduled to be published for public comment on November 30, 2015. The comment period is scheduled to close December 21, 2015.

See also on Domain Mondo:

• IANA, ICANN Accountability, CCWG Crunch Time! Midnight Deadlines! 19 Nov 2015
• CCWG on ICANN Accountability Issues Preview of Third Draft Proposal 16 Nov 2015
• IANA Transition, ICANN Accountability, New CCWG Proposal, New Timeline 29 Oct 2015

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

IANA, ICANN Accountability, CCWG Crunch Time! Midnight Deadlines!

UPDATE 30 Nov 2015: CCWG-Accountability - Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations now open for comments.  Comments close 21 Dec 2015 23:59 UTC.

In order to brief the community on the contents of their Draft proposal, the CCWG-Accountability will host two identical briefing webinars on Wednesday, 2 December at different times to facilitate participation across time zones. The webinars will take place on:

• 2 December from 11:00 – 12:30 UTC (time zone converter here)
• 2 December from 20:00 – 21:30 UTC (time zone converter here)

The webinars will be run online via Adobe Connect room (Strategic Initiatives Webinar).

If you are interested in attending the webinar but would like to receive phone dial-in details, please send an email to acct-staff@icann.org and indicate your language request (if needed). The webinars will be recorded and transcribed. Live interpretation will be made available in English, Spanish, French, Chinese, Arabic, Russian and Portuguese. More info here.

IANA Transition: CCWG-Accountability Schedule (source: ICANN.org)

It's Crunch Time for the Cross-Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability)--everyone is waiting on the CCWG to finish its work so the complete IANA Stewardship Transition Plan as requested by NTIA (US Department of Commerce)--IANA Functions Proposal (ICG) + ICANN Accountability Proposal (CCWG)--may be received by the ICANN Board, and in turn, transmitted by the ICANN Board to NTIA for review and approval.

People are working overtime, ICANN has hired professional writers ("Writing team" in schedule above) to finish the job, and hopefully, the Chartering organizations will timely approve the coming 3rd Draft Proposal so it may be transmitted by ICANN to the NTIA in January, 2016. At least that's the Plan. Biggest sticking point at this time appears to be Stress Test 18 relating to GAC advice.UPDATE: See NTIA vetoes ....

While some CCWG participants have questioned the CCWG timeline--see, e.g., here and here--so far, it's pedal to the metal as the steamroller moves on! Stay tuned--Domain Mondo is following this one closely.

See also on Domain Mondo:

•  NTIA Vetoes Compromise Proposal on GAC Advice to ICANN Board 26 Nov 2015
• CCWG on ICANN Accountability Issues Preview of Third Draft Proposal 16 Nov 2015
• IANA Transition, ICANN Accountability, New CCWG Proposal, New Timeline 29 Oct 2015
• CCWG Steamroller! ICANN 'Chattering' Organizations In Parallel Universe! 21 Oct 2015
• ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade "Steamrolled" by CCWG-Accountability Co-Chair 27 Sep 2015

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

CCWG on ICANN Accountability Issues Preview of Third Draft Proposal

Above: Screenshot of front page of CCWG-Accountability: A Preview of the Third Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations (pdf) (15 Nov 2015)

CCWG-Accountability Issues Formal Update on Progress Made In and After ICANN54 in Dublin: "This is a brief and preliminary overview of the proposal for improving ICANN's accountability developed by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) over the past year. It includes a very high-level summary of the main changes being proposed by the community and outlines what will be described in the full proposal. This 36-page document is designed to update the community on recent progress in and after ICANN54 in Dublin and raise awareness of the proposed enhancements to ICANN's accountability as a more detailed proposal is finalized. While this formal update reflects the current consensus positions of the group, there are outstanding elements that remain to be finalized. These finishing details are highlighted in the document, and will be confirmed and detailed in the Third Draft Proposal." (source: ICANN CCWG-Accountability; emphasis added).

The full Third Draft Proposal will be published on 30 November 2015, for public review and comment, and will include "further explanation and detail about the accountability improvements" outlined in the Preview document. It will also "explain why the changes have been suggested, how the community arrived at these recommendations and the options considered and ultimately rejected in development of the proposal."

Background: Over the last year, a working group of ICANN community members has been developing a set of proposed enhancements to ICANN's accountability to the global Internet community. This effort is integral to the transition of the United States' stewardship of the IANA functions to the global Internet community, reflecting the ICANN community's conclusion that improvements to ICANN's accountability were necessary in the absence of the accountability backstop that the historical contractual relationship with the United States government provided. The accountability improvements set out in this document are not designed to change ICANN's multistakeholder model, the bottom-up nature of policy development nor significantly alter ICANN's day-to-day operations. The main elements of the proposal are outlined below. Together with ICANN's existing structures and groups, these accountability enhancements will ensure ICANN remains accountable to the global Internet community.

A revised Mission statement for the ICANN Bylaws that sets out what ICANN does. This Mission statement clarifies but does not change ICANN's historic mission

An enhanced Independent Review Process and redress process with a broader scope and the power to ensure ICANN stays within its revised Mission

New specific powers for the ICANN community that can be enforced when the usual methods of discussion and dialogue have not effectively built consensus including the powers to:

• Reject ICANN Budgets, Operating Plans or Strategic Plans
• Reject changes to ICANN's Bylaws
• Approve changes to new Fundamental Bylaws (see below)
• Remove an individual ICANN Director from the Board
• Recall the entire ICANN Board

An additional new power that gives the community a say in decisions about the IANA Function Reviews and any separation of the IANA Names Functions

All of these community powers can only be exercised after extensive community discussions and debates through processes of engagement and escalation. The process of escalation provides many opportunities for the resolution of disagreements between the parties before formal action is required.

The accountability elements outlined above will be supported through:

• Additions to the ICANN Bylaws to create an Empowered Community that is based on a simple legal vehicle that will act on the instructions of ICANN stakeholder groups to exercise the Community Powers. The Empowered Community is granted the status of a Designator (a recognized role in law) and has the standing to enforce the Community Powers if needed.
• Core elements of ICANN's governing documents (the Articles and Bylaws) being categorized asFundamental Bylaws that can only be changed with agreement between the ICANN community and the ICANN Board.

In addition, further proposed changes include:

• A recognition of ICANN's respect for Human Rights
• Incorporation of ICANN's commitments under the 2009 Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) with the United States Department of Commerce into the Bylaws, where appropriate
• Improved accountability and diversity for ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees (SO/ACs)
• A commitment to discuss additional accountability improvements and broader accountability enhancements in 2016, following implementation of this core set of accountability improvements.

For more information read the entire announcement here.
Source: ICANN (emphasis added)

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

ICANN Board of Directors Reviewing CCWG-Accountability Proposal

ICANN Board of Directors Reviewing the CCWG-Accountability Proposal:

"The Board is deeply engaged in reviewing the CCWG-Accountability proposal and has actively participated in the process. Consistent with our commitment to transparency, we would like to share with the Community the steps in our review process.

"Last week, the ICANN Board submitted a preliminary set of comments to the CCWG-Accountability Public Comment forum. The Board remains committed to engaging and working with the CCWG on solutions to address concerns raised in its preliminary set of comments.

"A subset of ICANN Board Members and Staff Members have been meeting in Washington, DC on Tuesday and Wednesday this week to further consider the CCWG proposal and commence a review of an impact analysis from ICANN's external counsel. As part of this meeting, the group held a call together with the CCWG Chairs. For full transparency and to clarify the basis for the review points and comments, ICANN will share the impact analysis and publish it in the CCWG Public Comment forum. The Board welcomes feedback from the CCWG on the impact analysis as it finalizes its responses to the CCWG proposal in the Public Comment forum.

"Next week, consistent with the CCWG request, the Board will have an open teleconference with the CCWG to help inform the Board's development of its comments to be submitted into the Public Comment forum before the close of the comment period on 12 September. Call details will be announced so that anyone in the community may participate.

"Finally, in light of the importance of these discussions, we propose that the CCWG-Accountability hold a public meeting in Los Angeles in late September to continue the dialogue with the Board on the CCWG proposal.

"As part of the ICANN community, we will continue to work constructively to help the CCWG finalize the proposal to achieve a successful IANA Stewardship transition and an ICANN with enhanced accountability. We remain appreciative of the CCWG's valuable work." (emphasis added)

Source: ICANN - ICANN Blog - Author: Steve Crocker, ICANN Board Chairman, 26 Aug 2015


Follow @DomainMondo

Webinar August 25th on 2nd Draft CCWG ICANN Accountability Proposal

WEBINAR Briefing on 2nd Draft CCWG-Accountability Proposal 

August 25, 2015, from 18:00 – 20:00 UTC (time zone converter here) 2:00 pm ET (US)

Webinar Details: The webinar will be run in an Adobe Connect room. 

If you are interested in attending the webinar and would like to receive dial-in details, send an email to acct-staff@icann.org and indicate your language request (if needed). 

The webinar will be conducted in English. Live interpretation services are available in Arabic, Chinese, French, Spanish and Portuguese. Livestreaming translation in RU will be unavailable for this call. A translation of the transcript will be provided after the meeting. ZH interpretation will be available for the first 90 minutes of the call, thereafter, please join the Virtual Meeting Room and/or English line for the remaining 30 minutes. PT interpretation will be available for the first 90 minutes of the call, thereafter, please join the Virtual Meeting Room and/or English line for the remaining 30 minutes.

The webinar will also be recorded and transcribed--transcripts will be posted on the CCWG-Accountability Wiki here.

Background:

The CCWG on Enhancing ICANN Accountability published its 2nd Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations for 40-day public comment on 3 August 2015. Community feedback is requested on this draft proposal of proposed enhancements to ICANN's accountability framework that the CCWG-Accountability has identified as essential to happen or be committed to before the IANA Stewardship Transition takes place.

Community feedback will help the CCWG-Accountability to improve its proposal and carry on with next steps, including Chartering Organizations' endorsement of the CCWG-Accountability recommendations before it is submitted to the ICANN Board during or shortly after ICANN54 in Dublin in October 2015.

In order to brief the community on the contents of their 2nd Draft Proposal, the CCWG-Accountability co-Chairs hosted two identical briefing webinars on 4 and 7 August at different times to facilitate participation across time zones. To provide the community with an additional opportunity to ask questions, a repeat session will be held on August 25th as indicated above.

For further information about the CCWG-Accountability: https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg.

For further information about the related IANA Stewardship Transition: https://www.icann.org/stewardship or https://www.ianacg.org

source: ICANN

Proposals' Comments close dates:

1. IANA Transition 8 Sep 2015
2. ICANN Accountability 12 Sep 2015 

Follow @DomainMondo

LIVE Webinars on the CWG-Stewardship's Final IANA Transition Proposal

LIVE Webinar Briefings on the CWG-Stewardship Proposal for the IANA Stewardship Transition:

Following Public Comment periods in December 2014 and April/May 2015, the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal for Naming Related Functions, otherwise known as CWG-Stewardship, finalized its proposal and has delivered it to SO/AC chartering organizations for approval. The chartering organizations will deliberate during the ICANN53 meeting in Buenos Aires, with expected delivery of the proposal to the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) by 25 June 2015.

In order to brief the community on the contents of the final proposal, the CWG-Stewardship Chairs will host two identical briefing webinars on 11 June at different times to facilitate participation across time zones. The webinars will take place on:

• June 11th from 06:00 – 07:30 UTC (time zone converter here) 2:00 AM EDT (US) note: this is the same as June 10th at 11:00 pm PDT (US)
• June 11th from 13:00 – 14:30 UTC (time zone converter here)  9 am EDT (US)

The webinars will be run in an Adobe Connect room. The webinars will be conducted in English, and will also be recorded, transcribed, and posted on the CWG-Stewardship Wiki.

The full ICANN announcement may be found here.


Follow @DomainMondo

NTIA's Larry Strickling Questions IANA CWG-Stewardship Draft Proposal

Ass't Secretary Larry Strickling of the US Department of Commerce, NTIA, which oversees ICANN and is involved in the IANA transition, spoke at the State of the Net Conference, January 27th--his full remarks are reprinted on expvc.com--excerpt below:

"Today, I would like to answer some of the questions that have arisen in recent weeks about NTIA’s role in the transition and then, to pose some questions of our own for stakeholders to consider as they continue their work to develop the plan.  We do so in good faith and in appreciation of the hard work of the volunteer community engaged in these discussions... We will provide informal feedback where appropriate.  We are as aware as anyone that we should not do anything that interferes with an open and participatory multistakeholder process.  We support a process where all ideas are welcome and where participants are able to test fully all transition options.  Nonetheless, the community should proceed as if it has only one chance to get this right. *Everyone has the responsibility to participate as they deem appropriate.  If, by asking questions, we can ensure that the community develops a well-thought-out plan that answers all reasonable concerns, we will do so...  We have taken a look at the December 1 proposal and the ensuing comments and discussion it has engendered.  As the CWG on the naming-related functions continues its work to finalize its draft proposal, NTIA would like to offer the following questions for the stakeholders to consider:

• The draft proposes the creation of three or four new entities to be involved in the naming related processes.  Could the creation of any new entity interfere with the security and stability of the DNS during and after the transition?  Given that the community will need to develop, implement and test new structures and processes prior to a final transition, can it get all this done in a timeframe consistent with the expectations of all stakeholders?
• Does the proposal ensure a predictable and reliable process for customers of root zone management services?  Under the current system, registry operators can be confident of the timing of review and implementation of routine root zone updates.  If a new committee takes up what is currently a routine procedural check, how will the community protect against processing delays and the potential for politicization of the system?
• In response to the December 1 draft, other suggestions have emerged.  Are all the options and proposals being adequately considered in a manner that is fair and transparent? 
• How does the proposal avoid re-creating existing concerns in a new form or creating new concerns?  If the concern is the accountability of the existing system, does creating new committees and structures simply create a new set of accountability questions? 

All of these questions require resolution prior to approval of any transition plan..."

*Note: Editor of Domain Mondo, John Poole, is a "participant" in the IANA transition CWG-stewardship process.

Follow @DomainMondo