> From:
Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl
> To:
lyman@interisle.net;
Becky.Burr@neustar.biz
> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 20:37:28 +0000
> CC:
IAB@Iab.org;
ssac@icann.org;
accountability-cross-community@icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Please review
regarding IAB comments on Mission Statement
>
> Dear all,
>
> In my opinion, this has nothing to do
with the IANA Stewardship Transition
> nor the enhancement of ICANNıs
accountability.
> We should not deal with this.
> Moreover, the argument that this is (will
become) a fundamental bylaw and
> thus ³difficult to fix later² is
incorrect. If the community feels that
> something should be fixed here, it will
be easier than it is now.
>
> best,
>
> Roelof
>
>
>
>
> On 31-10-15 09:56, "
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on
> behalf of Lyman Chapin" <
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org
> on behalf of
lyman@interisle.net>
wrote:
>
> >Becky and CCWG members -
> >
> >Because the mission statement will be
a fundamental bylaw - and therefore
> >by design extremely difficult to
"fix" later - the concern expressed by
> >the IAB (and echoed by others during
the Dublin meeting) is a lot more
> >important than it might seem; it's
not just a matter of preferring
> >different words to describe roughly
the same thing. ICANN's current
> >mission statement is empirically
incorrect; as a simple matter of fact,
> >ICANN does not ³coordinate, at the
overall level, the global Internetıs
> >system of unique identifiers.² Using
the same empirical standard, the
> >alternatives (to this and other parts
of the mission statement) proposed
> >by the IAB are factually accurate. On
that basis alone it seems obvious
> >that the CCWG should prefer the IAB's
formulation to the one that stands
> >in the current bylaws, or
alternatively should work with the IAB to
> >develop and mutually agree upon more
accurate wording, and we recommend
> >that it do so.
> >
> >- Lyman and Julie
> >
> >On Oct 30, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Burr,
Becky wrote:
> >
> >> CCWG Members
> >>
> >> The IAB has raised a significant
concern about the Mission Statement,
> >>which currently describes ICANNıs
role of coordinating the allocation
> >>and assignment of the DNSı unique
identifiers, including Protocol port
> >>and parameter numbers. As some of
you may recall, in early comments
> >>they suggested changing the word
³coordination² to ³support.² WP2
> >>discussed this and declined to
modify the existing language in the
> >>Bylaws, but provided an
opportunity for the ASO, the Root Server
> >>community, and the port/parameter
community to provide their own
> >>description of what policy
³coordination² would mean in each (i.e.,
> >>names, numbers, root servers,
protocol/parameters) context.
> >>
> >> Andrew Sullivan, Chair of IAB,
has informed me that the IAB remains
> >>very concerned about the Mission
Statement. According to Andrew (on
> >>behalf of the IAB), ³the mission
statement (including the chapeau) is
> >>misleading, has caused us
problems in the past, and has been false at
> >>least since the end of the PSO
[Protocol Supporting Organization] and
> >>arguably before that. In
particular, according to the IAB, ³ICANN does
> >>not "coordinate, at the overall
level, the global Internet's systems of
> >>unique identifiers.²
> >>
> >> This issue was discussed in the
Public Forum in Dublin, and Steve
> >>Crocker expressed support for
working to align ICANNıs description of
> >>its role in this area more
precisely:
> >>
> >> ANDREW SULLIVAN: Hi, my name is
Andrew Sullivan. And I'm chair of the
> >>Internet Architecture Board. The
mission of ICANN currently has text
> >>that ICANN -- and I quote -- is
to coordinate at the overall level, the
> >>global Internet systems of unique
identifiers. End quote. That's not
> >>precisely true any more and
hasn't been at least since the protocol
> >>supporting organization
disappeared from ICANN. I'm wondering whether
> >>the Board is open to changing
this part of the mission since it's open
> >>anyway in the CCWG process?
> >>
> >> STEVE CROCKER: I think I'm the
designated hitter here. Andrew, thank
> >>you very much. There's been a
somewhat uncomfortable disparity between
> >>some of the words that we use to
describe ourselves and some of the
> >>words that our close friends use
to describe us. We have -- and we've --
> >>some of us have been paying
attention for a while. The good news -- I
> >>think it's extremely good news --
is that over the last relatively short
> >>period of time, we have built a
much stronger technical team, step one.
> >>And step 2 is would are we have
actually got them connected to the
> >>communications process. Harder
than I would have liked it to have been.
> >>But it's now there. And it's been
one of these behind the scenes things
> >>of where we've been pressing. So
I think that, going forward, we're
> >>going to try to align our words
in a more careful way. There's always a
> >>lot of equities about how many
words you use to describe yourself which,
> >>you know. But I think some
greater precision and adjustment of the
> >>nuances is well in order.
> >>
> >> The IAB has provided some
proposed text, which addresses the concerns
> >>of its members. I have attached a
side-by-side comparison of (1) the
> >>Existing Mission Statement; (2)
the current CCWG proposal; and (3) the
> >>IAB proposal. I should note that
the proposed changes appear to be more
> >>dramatic than they actually are.
Most of the changes reflect moving the
> >>language around. The substantive
changes include:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Current Bylaws/CCWG Proposal
> >>
> >>
> >> IAB Proposal
> >>
> >>
> >> ICANNıs mission is to
³coordinate, at the overall level, the global
> >>Internetıs system of unique
identifiers²
> >>
> >>
> >> ICANNıs mission is to ³support,
at the overall level, core Internet
> >>registries²
> >>
> >>
> >> ICANN coordinates the allocation
and assignment of ³Domain Names
> >>(forming a system referred to as
³DNS²)
> >>
> >>
> >> ICANN coordinates the allocation
and assignment of ³names in the root
> >>zone of the Domain Name System
(³DNS²)
> >>
> >>
> >> ICANN coordinates the
³allocation and assignment of protocol port
and
> >>parameter numbers²
> >>
> >>
> >> ICANN ³collaborates with other
bodies as appropriate to publish core
> >>registries needed for the
functioning of the Internet.²
> >>
> >>
> >> As indicated above, a more
complete comparison is attached. Given the
> >>strength of the IABıs views on
this point, I thought it was important to
> >>raise this issue for discussion.
> >>
> >> Becky
> >>
> >> J. Beckwith Burr
> >> Deputy General Counsel &
Chief Privacy Officer
> >>
> >> <IAB Proposed Mission
Statement Changes 30
>
>>October.pdf>_______________________________________________
> >> Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list
> >>
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
> >>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> >
>
>_______________________________________________
> >Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list
> >
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
> >
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing
list
>
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community