[apnic-announce] Joint RIR Statement on ICANN Evolution and Reform
[Note "reply-to:" field]
Dear Colleague,
The following statement on ICANN Reform has been prepared by the boards
of the three Regional Internet Registries, APNIC, ARIN and RIPE NCC.
It was forwarded this morning to the Committee on ICANN Evolution and
Reform.
If you would like to comment on this statement or on the ICANN reform
process, please do so on the apnic-talk mailing list or via the ICANN
Reform comment forum, which are accessible at:
http://www.apnic.net/lists
http://forum.icann.org/reform-comments
More information from ICANN on the reform process is available at:
http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform
Regards,
Paul Wilson
*********************************************************
Regional Internet Registries' Submission to the Committee on ICANN
Evolution and Reform
20 June 2002
1. Introduction
The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) jointly undertake the role of
management of IP number resources through the allocation of IP number
resources to network operators and Local Internet Registries. This
managerial role is in support of the ultimate requirement within the
Internet to associate network resources with numbers drawn from the
relevant public Internet number space.
The three existing RIRs are set up as not-for-profit membership
organizations with thousands of operators and other companies as
members. They have undertaken this function for between five and ten
years.
The RIRs are responsible for a critical component in the operational
infrastructure of the Internet, and are mindful that in order to execute
this role effectively they must operate within parameters of stability,
predictability and efficiency of provided services, together with
fairness, openness to participation and transparency in the related area
of determination of RIR resource management policies.
The RIRs welcome this opportunity to comment on ICANN Evolution and
Reform. It represents an opportunity to assess the relationship between
the RIRs and ICANN in the light of a number of years of experience of
working together, and, in so doing, propose a number of changes to this
relationship which would enhance the functioning of both the RIRs and
ICANN.
The RIRs have already noted, in a submission to ICANN dated 8 May 2002,
the set of principles that should frame the interaction between ICANN
and the RIRs. The RIRs note that these principles were not substantively
addressed by the Committee on ICANN Reform and Evolution paper of 31 May
2002.
This submission does not address the entirety of issues noted in the
ICANN Committee's report, as it specifically addresses only those
matters which have a bearing on the RIRs' ability to undertake their
role.
The relationship between the RIRs and ICANN encompasses:
- the operation of the assignment of number resources from the
Internet Assigned Number Authority to the RIRs,
- policy aspects concerning the adoption of common global policies,
and
- governance of procedures relating to the recognition of additional
RIRs.
Within the responsibilities of the Address Council of the Address
Supporting Organization (ASO) there is the additional role of:
- nominating three individuals to serve as members of the Board of
ICANN.
The RIRs note that the RIRs and the ASO are generally acknowledged to be
functioning well. The RIRs operate as industry self-regulatory bodies,
using open policy fora to develop operating policies that reflect the
consensus positions of their constituencies. The RIRs operate
responsibly and fairly in their application of management policies, and
have well established review processes to ensure that these policies are
applied consistently and fairly.
RIR Position:
The RIRs would like to construct upon this foundation of effective
operating practice to assume greater levels of responsibility for
operational roles that are currently shared between the RIRs and
ICANN. This is intended to allow ICANN to function properly as an
independent body with the power of review, such that ICANN can
properly assume a responsibility for oversight of the RIR
activities in terms of ensuring that the RIRs operate within their
adopted policies and processes, without being compromised in its
independence by also assuming a level of direct responsibility in
the operation of the address management process.
2. The Operation of the IANA Address Registry
The working paper on ICANN Mission and Core Values notes that the
mission of ICANN includes the coordination of the allocation and
assignment of identifiers from the unicast IP v4 and IPv6 protocol
address pool, and Autonomous System numbers.
The 31 May report of the Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform noted
that the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) could be the body
responsible for directly overseeing the technical operational activities
of ICANN (largely but not exclusively the work of the IANA). The RIRs
understand that such a responsibility would encompass the operation of
assignment of identifier blocks to the RIRs. This report also noted that
"a careful evaluation should be made of which of ICANN operational tasks
are appropriately allocated to ICANN and which could be subrogated or
outsourced to other entities".
RIR Position:
The RIRs are not in favour of passing this operational
responsibility to a TAC. Furthermore, as noted in the RIR
Statement of Principles, the RIRs see no requirement or further
benefit in having a two level address management process of
initial allocations by ICANN to RIRs and subsequent allocations
from RIRs to local registries and end users.
The RIRs have concluded that in the interests of enhanced
stability and efficiency, the responsibility for this particular
IANA operational function (maintaining the IANA Address Registry)
should be passed to the RIRs.
The RIRs would see it as a desirable consequence to develop with
ICANN adequate safeguards regarding longer term stewardship of the
address resource.
3. Global RIR Policies
The Memorandum of Understanding relating to the establishment of the ASO
assigned to this organization the responsibility for the development of
global policies relating to the management of Internet addresses. The
Memorandum notes that, in general, proposals for such policies would be
developed within the RIRs and forwarded to the ASO for their
consideration. The ASO then passes such proposals to the ICANN Board for
further consideration and formal adoption.
RIR Position:
The RIRs are of the view that this duplication of the review
function by both the ASO and ICANN is unnecessary, and adds
overhead without benefit.
In the interests of simplifying the current process, and reducing
the levels of duplication of function, the RIRs propose that the
ASO undertakes the responsibility for formal adoption of global
RIR policies, allowing for open review of such policies as part of
its function of review and evaluation.
Furthermore, the RIRs propose that ICANN's role in this area is
that of oversight of the ASO process, ensuring that the RIRs and
the ASO adhere to their stated procedures in the undertaking of
this function. In this fashion ICANN provides the appropriate
checks and balances in the RIRs' and the ASO's policy development
process to ensure that the process is managed with the appropriate
level of integrity.
4. Recognition of Additional RIRs
The Memorandum of Understanding relating to the establishment of the ASO
assigned to ICANN the responsibility for the development of requirements
and policies for the approval of additional RIRs, and enumerated a
number of requirements that were agreed to form part of that policy. The
RIRs note that they have unanimously supported and encouraged the
establishment of LACNIC and AFRINIC.
RIR Position:
The RIRs propose that this responsibility be delegated to the ASO,
and that ICANN adopt the role of oversight through review and
reconsideration of ASO decisions in the event of a dispute. This
proposal is intended to ensure that ICANN can operate with
integrity as an independent and open body that can fairly review
ASO's actions in application of the relevant adopted policies. The
current process of placing both the decision-making responsibility
and the responsibility for review within ICANN allows for a
potential situation of unclear and possibly conflicted interest on
the part of ICANN.
5. Nomination of ICANN Board Members
The Memorandum of Understanding relating to the establishment of the ASO
assigned to the Address Council of the ASO the responsibility for the
nomination of three Board members of ICANN. The 31 May Evolution and
Reform report proposed that the chair of the Address Council, or a
delegate be an ex-officio member of the Board of ICANN.
RIR Position:
In the scenario that the RIRs and the ASO assume a greater level
of responsibility for operational and policy roles in managing
Internet Address space, as proposed in this submission, the RIRs
see little benefit in having the ASO seat more than one member of
the ICANN Board, and is in agreement with the proposal that the
chair of the Address Council be an ex-officio of the ICANN
Board. It is noted that this agreement is conditional on a
realignment of roles and responsibilities between ICANN, the ASO
and the RIRs as proposed here.
6. General Comment
The RIRs have a direct and ongoing responsibility to undertake their
role in management of Internet address resources. The RIRs have
undertaken this role without any formal contract with IANA for many
years, and, since 1999, on the basis of a Memorandum of Understanding.
The RIRs would be willing to further formalize the relation with ICANN
in the context of the proposals contained in this document.
The RIRs view with considerable concern the manner in which ICANN has
assumed a critical role in the operation of certain aspects of the
address management function, and at the same time, allowed itself to
become deeply enmeshed in the complex issues of domain name management
to the effective exclusion of all other roles. This assumption of
responsibility without the wherewithal to undertake the associated role
is not a desirable or stable position. The RIRs would propose that the
relationship between the RIRs and ICANN be rephrased in a manner that
aligns the onus of operational responsibility with the RIRs, and the
onus of issues of adoption of global policy with the ASO, allowing ICANN
to function as a venue for responsible review of those policies that are
developed within the RIR process and that are common to all RIRs (global
policies). As noted in the previous RIR statement on this subject, the
RIRs see no value in an ICANN structure that admits the possibility of
imposition of arbitrary and potentially capricious policies onto the
management of Internet resources.
Given the discussion about ICANN reform the future of ICANN is by no
means assured, and it is essential that we can ensure that the Internet
and its associated infrastructure service roles should continue to
function even if ICANN fails. Part of the intent of these proposals is
to ensure that the Internet is not critically dependent on the
continuation of one of the operational roles of ICANN, and that ICANN
can operate as an efficient entity that can provide the appropriate
levels of oversight and review to the RIR role without becoming a
critical single point of failure for the entire network.
The Regional Internet Registries are:
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (www.apnic.net) (APNIC)
The American Registry for Internet Numbers (www.arin.net) (ARIN)
Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (www.ripe.net) (RIPE
NCC)
Paul Wilson Raymond A. Plzak Axel Pawlik
Director General President & CEO Managing Director
APNIC ARIN RIPE NCC
* APNIC-ANNOUNCE: Announcements concerning APNIC *
* To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe" to apnic-announce-request at apnic dot net *