Please see the original links here:
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-discussion-2015-02-24
-en
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/update-on-iana-stewardship-discussion-24-feb
ruary-2015


ICANN is compiling bi-weekly updates on the community discussions and
progress of the IANAStewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN
Accountability Processes. This information is positioned to help inform
interested stakeholders in the recent developments in the processes,
upcoming key dates, latest documents and drafts and a snapshot of any news
coverage that occurs over the timeframe.
An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions
ICANN 52
During ICANN 52 <http://singapore52.icann.org/en/>  in Singapore, between 6
and 12 February, more than 41 hours were spent on discussions around the
IANA stewardship transition and related ICANN accountability processes. The
discussions consisted of:
* Community-wide information and question and answer sessions
* Public working sessions by:
> * IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG <http://ianacg.org/> )
> * Cross-Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition
> Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG Stewardship
> <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/CWG+to+Develop+an+IANA+
> Stewardship+Transition+Proposal+on+Naming+Related+Functions> )
> * Cross-Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG
> Accountability 
> <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/CCWG+on+Enhancing+ICANN+Acc
> ountability> ).
* Stakeholder-specific discussions within individual Supporting
Organizations, including many of the component constituencies of the GNSO,
and within the Advisory Committees.
The community-wide sessions provided online participation mechanisms and
were webcast and transcribed live. Transcripts and audio of all sessions,
including those not transcribed live, are nowavailable online
<http://singapore52.icann.org/en/materials> .
The following is a summary of transition and accountability-related
discussions atICANN 52.
Clarifications from NTIA:
* NTIA <http://ntia.doc.gov/>  reiterated that although the current IANA
contract expires 30 September 2015, that is not a deadline for the
transition but a target date. The transition can occur whenever the
multistakeholder community develops a plan both it and NTIA can accept.
* NTIA expects a single proposal for the IANA stewardship transition.
* NTIA does not expect any dissenting opinions to accompany the final
proposal.
* NTIA expects the IANA-related accountability mechanisms being developed
through Work Stream 1 of CCWG Accountability to be submitted at the same
time as the ICG proposal.
* Although the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015
<http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-113HPRT91668/pdf/CPRT-113HPRT91668.pdf>
[PDF, 3.44 MB] prohibits NTIA from spending any money to relinquish the
contract through 30 September 2015, this does not prevent the NTIA from
providing informal feedback when asked questions by the community nor does
it prevent the community's ability to continue developing a proposal for the
transition.
Key ICG updates and discussions:
* The ICG discussed the progress of the review of the protocol parameters
and numbers community proposals the group had received, resolving
<https://www.dropbox.com/s/wad3entgv3dqr3m/Summary%20of%20internally%20resol
ved%20questions-v2.xlsx?dl=0>  a number of questions ICG members had had
about both proposals. There was discussion about how to handle public
comments on the names proposal, once submitted, due to concerns that the
proposal could attract significant numbers of public comments and that it
might not be practical to forward each individual comment to the CWG
Stewardship for its consideration.
* There were discussions about the effect that the extended timeline for the
CWG Stewardship proposal would have on the ICG's final proposal, with
agreement to review the ICG's current timeline based on more detailed review
of the work that can be completed independent of the names proposal. It was
noted that, as many members of the ICG were following the CWG Stewardship
work, much of the ICG's work on the names proposal could take place before
the final CWG proposal was formally delivered to the ICG.
CWG Stewardship and CCWG Accountability:
* The two groups confirmed they were planning to use the same legal counsel
for advice on the legal viability of proposal ideas under discussion.
Although ICANN would pay for the legal advice, the clients would be the CWG
and CCWG, not ICANN.
* Recognizing the interdependent and interrelated nature of the two groups,
the Chairs of both groups are also in regular contact to ensure close
coordination between the two processes.
Key CWG Stewardship updates and discussions:
* A final version of a Discussion Document
<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49351404/CWG-SingaporeDisc
ussionDocument-Final.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1422998880000&api=v2>
[PDF, 447 KB] was published on 3 February to bring the wider community up to
date on its work and encourage further community input.
* The CWG Stewardship explained that the reasons the names component of the
IANA stewardship proposal was taking longer than the numbers and protocol
parameters components was due to the complexity of the names communities.
CWG members were meeting very regularly – sometimes daily – to progress the
work of the group.
* The CWG Stewardship clarified that although there were still significant
differences of opinion about the two main models on the table – "external"
trust (oversight of IANA exists outside ICANN) versus "internal" trust
(ICANN performs IANA stewardship function, with possibly a "golden bylaw" to
ensure ICANN can be held accountable to community) – the vast majority of
issues under discussion in the CWG were enjoying significant consensus. The
CWG hoped that after it received legal advice on the external and internal
options under discussion, some of the current proposal options could be
found to be unviable and reduce the number of options from which the CWG
needed to choose. 
Key CCWG Accountability updates and discussions:
* Work Stream 1, which is examining the accountability mechanisms that must
be in place or committed to within the timeframe of the IANA stewardship
transition, has formed two Working Parties (WP): WP 1 is examining how the
community can be empowered to hold the ICANN Board accountable while WP 2 is
examining possible review and redress processes. There was a suggestion to
clarify which accountability mechanisms in Work Stream 1 were "triggered"
(by a specific action or non-action by ICANN) or "non-triggered" (part of
regular ICANN processes).
Governmental Advisory Committee:
* In its Singapore Communiqué
<https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/GAC_SINGAPORE52_COMM
UNIQUE_FINAL2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1423724031000&api=v2>  [PDF,
113 KB], the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee(GAC
<https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee> )
committed to continue working with the CWG-Stewardship and
CCWG-Accountability both through individual GAC members and through the
designated GAC representatives to both groups. The GAC also noted that the
IANA stewardship process would have the highest priority for the GAC's
intersessional work in the lead-up to ICANN 53
<https://buenosaires53.icann.org/>  in Buenos Aires.
More detailed information about post-ICANN 52 work in the ICG,
CWG-Stewardship, and CCWG-Accountability will follow in the next update.
Updates on other transition-related activities
1. ICANN Board
2. On 12 February, a short statement from the ICANN Board
<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-02-12-en>  was published.
The key section of the statement is included below:
> 3. "ICANN is expecting to receive both proposals [from the ICG and CCWG
> Accountability] at roughly the same time. When ICANN receives these proposals,
> we will forward them promptly and without modification to NTIA. As we have
> previously stated, if we do submit the proposals with an accompanying
> communication of comments, they will be on points we had already shared with
> the community during the development of the proposals. […] With respect to
> improvements in our accountability, we are definitely open to improvements."
4. 
5. Internet Society (ISOC)
6. At its 15 February meeting
<http://www.internetsociety.org/news/internet-society-board-trustees-encoura
ges-continued-trust-multistakeholder-process-iana> , the ISOC Board stressed
that "successful transition will reinforce the value of the collaborative,
multistakeholder model", with the Board Chair noting that the process "is a
true reflection of the power of the multistakeholder approach to bring
parties together to solve complex problems".
7. 
8. International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
9. During the ITU's Member States-only Council Working Group on
International Internet-related Public Policy Issues (CWG-Internet
<http://www.itu.int/council/groups/CWG-internet/index.html> ), 2-3 February,
one Member State proposed including theIANA stewardship transition as a
topic for open consultations preceding the CWG-Internet's next meeting in
October, with the aim of CWG-Internet providing input into the IANA
stewardship process. There was support from some States at the meeting to
hold such a consultation while others were opposed. Therefore, the topic
will not proceed to public consultation. However, supporting States
indicated they might suggest the IANA stewardship transition as a topic
again at the October meeting for the CWG-Internet's subsequent open
consultation.
Upcoming key dates
24 Feb 2015CWG-Stewardship Meeting #23
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Meetings> ,
17:00-19:00
CCWG-Accountability meeting #14
<https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Meetings> , 19:00-21:00
UTC
25 Feb 2015ICG Call #12
<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/2015-February/003106.html> ,
4:00-5:30 UTC
Preserving the Multistakeholder Model of Internet Governance
<http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id
=683924ae-83d7-4bf4-922a-cdecb9556ba9&ContentType_id=14f995b9-dfa5-407a-9d35
-56cc7152a7ed&Group_id=b06c39af-e033-4cba-9221-de668ca1978a&MonthDisplay=2&Y
earDisplay=2015>  – US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, &
Transportation hearing on IANAstewardship, 15:00 UTC
26 Feb 2015CWG-Stewardship Meeting #24
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Meetings> ,
11:00-13:00 UTC
3 Mar 2015CCWG-Accountability meeting #15
<https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Meetings> , 12:00-14:00
UTC
CWG-Stewardship Meeting #25
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Meetings> ,
17:00-19:00 UTC
4 Mar 2015Update on the IANA Stewardship Transition Process
<http://www.internetsociety.org/ianaxfer>  – ISOC webinar 14:00 UTC
5 Mar 2015CWG-Stewardship Meeting #26
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Meetings> ,
11:00-13:00 UTC
23-24 Mar 2015 CCWG-Accountability Face-to-Face meeting. Details to be
confirmed.
26-27 Mar 2015 CWG-Stewardship Face-to-Face meeting. Details to be
confirmed.
Latest documents and drafts
12 Feb 2015CWG-Stewardship Chairs' Summary of ICANN 52 Meeting
<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52889466>
18 Feb 2015Feedback collected from ICANN 52 for review & analysis by CWG
Stewardship 
<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49351404/CollectedFeedback
fromICANN52.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1424306998000&api=v2> [DOCX, 40
KB]
CWG-Stewardship timeline
<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20150219/0e71f1df/CWG
-Stewardship-ProjPlan-20150218-0001.pdf>  [PDF, 243 KB]
21 Feb 2015ICG summary of internally resolved questions regarding the
protocol parameters & numbers proposals
<https://www.dropbox.com/s/wad3entgv3dqr3m/Summary%20of%20internally%20resol
ved%20questions-v2.xlsx?dl=0>
IANA stewardship in the news
Feb 2015ДО СИХ ПОР НЕЯСНА БУДУЩАЯ АРХИТЕКТУРА КОНТРОЛЯ НАД ФУНКЦИЯМИ IANA
<http://pircenter.org/media/content/files/13/14243433340.pdf>  [PDF, 388
KB], PIR Center [RU]
10 Feb 2015ICANN 52: Where does the IANA transition and Internet governance
go from here?, 
<https://ccgnludelhi.wordpress.com/2015/02/10/icann-52-where-does-the-iana-t
ransition-and-internet-governance-go-from-here-i/>  National Law University
Delhi [EN]
10 Feb 2015The last third: Why the IANA transition for names is hard
<http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/02/10/the-last-third-why-the-iana-tr
ansition-for-names-is-hard/> , Internet Governance Project [EN]
13 Feb 2015ICANN-Tagung: Experten fordern von den USA unabhängige IANA
<http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/ICANN-Tagung-Experten-fordern-von-de
n-USA-unabhaengige-IANA-2548976.html> , Heise Online [DE]
20 Feb 2015ICANN 52 reflection
<https://internetnz.nz/blog/icann-52-reflection> , InternetNZ [EN]
You can play a role in IANA's future…
Anyone can participate in discussions about the future of IANA's stewardship
and ICANN accountability. For information on joining CWG-Stewardship,
contact grace.abuhamad@icann.org. For information on joining
CCWG-Accountability, contact accountability-staff@icann.org.
This update can also be found here:
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-discussion-2015-02-24
-en

Compiled on behalf of ICANN by Samantha Dickinson | 23 February 2015