IANAxfer September 2014

ianaxfer@apnic.net

7 participants
5 discussions

Re: [IANAxfer@apnic] Key elements of the transition of IANA stewardship
by David Conrad 14 Sep '14

14 Sep '14

Richard, On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:51 AM, Richard Hill <rhill(a)hill-a.ch> wrote: > NOTE: this message has been cross-posted individually to the RIR mailing > lists dealing with this issue. (Perhaps it’s only me, but I feel this proliferation of lists dealing with the IANA transition is getting to be a bit much.) > Thus, the ICANN Board has ultimate responsibility for IP address policies. Not really. Ultimate responsibility for IP address policies resides with the ISPs that abide by those policies. I figure the role of ICANN’s Board is primarily to provide a mechanism by which interests outside of the RIR world can provide input into Internet numbering policies. > Up to now, under the IANA functions contract with the NTIA, ICANN was > clearly bound to defer to the RIRs for what concerns IP address policies. While it is true the IANA functions contract requires ICANN to abide by the outcome of RIR policies/processes, that particular clause of the contract was entirely unnecessary (just like the clause discussing protocol parameters). If ICANN did not abide by the outcome of RIR policies/processes, the RIRs had already created an entity (the NRO) that was specifically designed to provide the exact same top-level coordinative service that IANA staff performs (that is, allocating top-level blocks of numbers to the RIRs) should ICANN be unable/unwilling to do so. > If there is no contract between ICANN and some external entity, then ICANN > would have unrestricted ultimate authority over IP addresses. That is, the > ICANN Board could, if it considered it appropriate, override RIR policies. The ICANN Board could also declare Pi = 4. > This puts too much power in the ICANN Board which, under ICANN's current > structure, is not accountable to any external entity. This is a common misunderstanding by folks who come from a world of top-down national law or treaty-based legal fiats to define policies. The Internet numbering world doesn’t work that way. Under the current Internet architecture, all the power resides in the entities that provide value to Internet numbers. The vast majority of that power resides in ISPs who provide routing services. A small amount of power resides in ICANN and the RIRs by their guarantees of uniqueness and by providing access to registration data. ICANN (and the RIRs) is ultimately accountable to the folks who make use of those uniqueness and registration services. If ICANN (or the RIRs) screw up sufficiently, they’ll simply be replaced. The entire Internet numbering administrative hierarchy is merely a way of avoiding ISPs having to enter into a myriad bilateral agreements about who “owns” what parts of the address space. ICANN and the RIRs provide a _coordinative_ service, ensuring address space assignments are not duplicated and that network operators can identify who “owns” a particular block of addresses. In that light, the concerns about ICANN running amok and overriding RIR policy is simply FUD spreading. If you don’t believe me, try the following (reductio ad absurdum) thought experiment: Assume, for sake of argument, that the ICANN Board go stark raving mad and decides to revoke all IPv4 allocations. They instruct ICANN staff to erase the text file that represents the existing ICANN-maintained registry for IPv4 addresses and have the IANA whois server return “unallocated” for every IPv4 query (I wonder how many people even know that IANA provides a whois server for top-level IP address blocks). Beyond the folks who will be hired to provide complete custodial care for the ICANN Board members (and political bodies who will try to take advantage of the situation), who would actually care? Would any operational body even notice? Do you believe ISPs will spontaneously decide to terminate routing service for the IPv4 address space they announce? Regards, -drc (ICANN CTO but speaking only for myself)

6 38

IANA transition RFP and Translations
by Paul Wilson 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

Dear Colleagues, The “Request for Proposals” for the IANA Transition plan has been released by the ICG here: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-09-09-en Also, ICANN has released translations of the RFP document (below), though I’m afraid that only the Chinese version will be useful to any of us in the AP region. There is now a review period for any questions or clarifications, open until 24 September. We will of course also review and discuss the IANA transition process in the coming week at APNIC 38, during the consultation session at 11am on 17 September. http://conference.apnic.net/38/program All the best Paul > > For your information, translation of the RfP are now available: > FR:https://www.icann.org/fr/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… > ES:https://www.icann.org/es/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… > RU:https://www.icann.org/ru/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… > AR:https://www.icann.org/ar/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… > PT:https://www.icann.org/pt/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… > ZH:https://www.icann.org/zh/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… > They were posted on your announcement - https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-09-09-en - and activities - https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icg-activities-2014-07-18-en - pages yesterday.

1 0

Draft IANA transition proposal, for APNIC 38 in Brisbane
by Paul Wilson 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

Dear colleagues, During APNIC38, there will be a Consultation Session on IANA stewardship transition to discuss the plan for IANA transition. It is very important to gather the voices of the Asia-Pacific IP addressing community on this topic. During the last 10 years, the RIR communities have expressed strong support for community-lead coordination of IANA functions, and called for an end to the US government (or any governmental) role in ICANN matters. The recent announcement by the US government expressing their intent to step down as the only overseer of the IANA functions is an opportunity to complete a long envisaged transition process. The APNIC Secretariat has produced a initial draft transition plan, for discussion during the consultation session. http://blog.apnic.net/2014/09/08/iana-session-apnic-38-a-discussion-proposa… We look forward to hearing your views, and discussing this proposal with the APNIC community. Best regards, Paul. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg(a)apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 See you at APNIC 38! http://conference.apnic.net/38

2 1

Fwd: Key elements of the transition of IANA stewardship
by David Conrad 11 Sep '14

11 Sep '14

(Forwarding as requested) Regards, -drc Begin forwarded message: > From: John Curran <jcurran(a)arin.net> > Subject: Re: [IANAxfer@apnic] Key elements of the transition of IANA stewardship > Date: September 10, 2014 at 6:29:06 PM PDT > To: David Conrad <drc(a)virtualized.org> > Cc: Richard Hill <rhill(a)hill-a.ch> > > On Sep 10, 2014, at 8:27 PM, David Conrad <drc(a)virtualized.org> wrote: >> >> Paging John Curran (cc’d on this note on the off chance that he isn’t on this list): what would ARIN do if ICANN told ARIN to transfer 18/8 to Richard Hill? >> ... > > ARIN would first instruct ICANN to place the instruction in writing... > > Upon receiving such a directive, we'd send a polite reply indicating > that ARIN can only update the registry based on adopted global and > regional number resource policies. As there is no policy which allows > for that transfer (and there is no provision for ICANN to create a > global number resource policy), the ICANN instruction would be invalid. > > FYI, > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > ARIN > > p.s. David - Feel free to forward to IANAxfer@apnic; I'll confess that I > am not subscribed to every single Internet mailing list... it just > seems that way. :-)

2 1

Tomorrow: Session at IGF on the IANA stewardship transition
by Izumi Okutani 04 Sep '14

04 Sep '14

Hi all, There will be a session on the IANA stewardship transition at IGF in Istanbul. Friday, September 5 . 9:30am - 11:00am (Local time in Istanbul: UTC+3) http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/schedule-igf2014 Anyone can participate remotely. Find details of remote participation below: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation-2014 I think it would be a good reference for the session on this topic at APNIC 38! Regards, Izumi Okutani

1 0

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

IANAxfer September 2014