Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New ICANN Bylaws
There is a lot in the new Bylaws that presumes the transition, but most is from the CWG/ICG Proposals. There is not a lot in the Bylaws associated directly with the CCWG that related to the transition, but there are some. The sections on community powers and the IRP refer to PTI, for instance. Given the time line we have been on, it would have made absolutely no sense to devote time to creating a set of Bylaws presuming the transition, and a separate set presuming no transition. Even if time had permitted, it would be poor public relations to have a set of Bylaws ready and adopted presuming the transition fails. I have problems with some of the Bylaws adopted (as do we all, I guess), but after nearly two grueling years of work, I am glad that we have reached this stage. I am willing to take the Board's statements at face value, and presume that if the transition does fail, we will revisit these Bylaws, extract the parts that no longer apply, and move ahead with the accountability measures. Alan At 27/05/2016 04:23 PM, Phil Corwin wrote:
In regard to this -- 'The Board is committed to working with the community to identify the portions of the CCWG-Accountability recommendations that can be implemented in the event that it is determined that ICANN's obligations to perform the IANA Functions will remain under contract with NTIA." -- why wouldn't all of them be implementable regardless of whether the transition occurs? That's a very carefully phrased statement that does not commit the Board to implementing any of them; it's just a commitment to have a dialogue with the community that designed the recommendations if the transition is delayed.
I'm having difficulty identifying a single new accountability measure that can't be implemented in the absence of the IANA transition. I am not and have not advocated for a delay, but just don't see how one is connected to the other so far as implementation goes (I understand the political connection, of course).
I hesitate to rain on the parade on what is a very important and overall positive development for the ICANN community, and I'm not advocating that the accountability improvements take effect before October 1. But these are needed improvements on which the community demonstrated strong consensus support.
Regards, Philip
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell
Twitter: @VlawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Eisner Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 3:02 PM To: avri doria; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New ICANN Bylaws
Hi Avri,
Here is the language from the Resolution on the effective date:
"Resolved (2016.05.27.02), the New ICANN Bylaws will be deemed effective upon the expiration the IANA Functions Contract between ICANN and NTIA. The Board reaffirms its Resolution 2016.03.10.18, stating, 'The Board is committed to working with the community to identify the portions of the CCWG-Accountability recommendations that can be implemented in the event that it is determined that ICANN's obligations to perform the IANA Functions will remain under contract with NTIA.¹"
Best regards,
Sam
On 5/27/16, 11:51 AM, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of avri doria" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of avri@apc.org> wrote:
Hi,
anyone know when they go into effect?
immediately?
avri
On 27-May-16 14:44, Hillary Jett wrote:
Original link: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/new-icann-bylaws
New ICANN Bylaws
*Author: Steve Crocker*
Today, on behalf of the ICANN Board, I am pleased to announce the adoption
<http://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-05-27->>en> of the new ICANN Bylaws
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/adopted-bylaws-27may16-en>>.pd f>, which reflect changes made as a result of the IANA Stewardship Transition package of proposals <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability>. The new Bylaws are the result of hundreds of hours of work by the community and the legal teams. The Regional Internet Registries Service Level Agreement and Internet Engineering Task Force Memorandum of Understanding Supplemental Agreement have also been approved for signing and will go into effect after the transition.
Later today, ICANN will be transmitting the new Bylaws to the U.S. Department of Commerce¹s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). NTIA has previously stated that adoption of the new Bylaws is required for them to complete their review of the proposals, which is expected to occur in June.
This is an important milestone for ICANN and the community. As we await the release of NTIA¹s report, we continue to prepare for implementation of the transition proposals. We thank everyone for their continued hard work and support during this transition process.
--
Hillary Jett Communications Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +1 (202) 674-3403 Email: hillary.jett@icann.org
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ 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
----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4568/12262 - Release Date: 05/19/16 Internal Virus Database is out of date. _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Alan, I think exactly the same. Kind regards Alberto Soto -----Mensaje original----- De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] En nombre de Alan Greenberg Enviado el: sábado, 28 de mayo de 2016 05:12 p.m. Para: Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com>; Samantha Eisner <Samantha.Eisner@icann.org>; avri doria <avri@apc.org>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Asunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New ICANN Bylaws There is a lot in the new Bylaws that presumes the transition, but most is from the CWG/ICG Proposals. There is not a lot in the Bylaws associated directly with the CCWG that related to the transition, but there are some. The sections on community powers and the IRP refer to PTI, for instance. Given the time line we have been on, it would have made absolutely no sense to devote time to creating a set of Bylaws presuming the transition, and a separate set presuming no transition. Even if time had permitted, it would be poor public relations to have a set of Bylaws ready and adopted presuming the transition fails. I have problems with some of the Bylaws adopted (as do we all, I guess), but after nearly two grueling years of work, I am glad that we have reached this stage. I am willing to take the Board's statements at face value, and presume that if the transition does fail, we will revisit these Bylaws, extract the parts that no longer apply, and move ahead with the accountability measures. Alan At 27/05/2016 04:23 PM, Phil Corwin wrote:
In regard to this -- 'The Board is committed to working with the community to identify the portions of the CCWG-Accountability recommendations that can be implemented in the event that it is determined that ICANN's obligations to perform the IANA Functions will remain under contract with NTIA." -- why wouldn't all of them be implementable regardless of whether the transition occurs? That's a very carefully phrased statement that does not commit the Board to implementing any of them; it's just a commitment to have a dialogue with the community that designed the recommendations if the transition is delayed.
I'm having difficulty identifying a single new accountability measure that can't be implemented in the absence of the IANA transition. I am not and have not advocated for a delay, but just don't see how one is connected to the other so far as implementation goes (I understand the political connection, of course).
I hesitate to rain on the parade on what is a very important and overall positive development for the ICANN community, and I'm not advocating that the accountability improvements take effect before October 1. But these are needed improvements on which the community demonstrated strong consensus support.
Regards, Philip
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell
Twitter: @VlawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Eisner Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 3:02 PM To: avri doria; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New ICANN Bylaws
Hi Avri,
Here is the language from the Resolution on the effective date:
"Resolved (2016.05.27.02), the New ICANN Bylaws will be deemed effective upon the expiration the IANA Functions Contract between ICANN and NTIA. The Board reaffirms its Resolution 2016.03.10.18, stating, 'The Board is committed to working with the community to identify the portions of the CCWG-Accountability recommendations that can be implemented in the event that it is determined that ICANN's obligations to perform the IANA Functions will remain under contract with NTIA.¹"
Best regards,
Sam
On 5/27/16, 11:51 AM, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of avri doria" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of avri@apc.org> wrote:
Hi,
anyone know when they go into effect?
immediately?
avri
On 27-May-16 14:44, Hillary Jett wrote:
Original link: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/new-icann-bylaws
New ICANN Bylaws
*Author: Steve Crocker*
Today, on behalf of the ICANN Board, I am pleased to announce the adoption
<http://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-05-2 7->>en> of the new ICANN Bylaws
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/adopted-bylaws-27may16- en>>.pd f>, which reflect changes made as a result of the IANA Stewardship Transition package of proposals <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability>. The new Bylaws are the result of hundreds of hours of work by the community and the legal teams. The Regional Internet Registries Service Level Agreement and Internet Engineering Task Force Memorandum of Understanding Supplemental Agreement have also been approved for signing and will go into effect after the transition.
Later today, ICANN will be transmitting the new Bylaws to the U.S. Department of Commerce¹s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). NTIA has previously stated that adoption of the new Bylaws is required for them to complete their review of the proposals, which is expected to occur in June.
This is an important milestone for ICANN and the community. As we await the release of NTIA¹s report, we continue to prepare for implementation of the transition proposals. We thank everyone for their continued hard work and support during this transition process.
--
Hillary Jett Communications Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +1 (202) 674-3403 Email: hillary.jett@icann.org
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-communit y
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ 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
----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4568/12262 - Release Date: 05/19/16 Internal Virus Database is out of date. _______________________________________________ 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 This email has been protected by YAC (Yet Another Cleaner) http://www.yac.mx
Hi, I guess I don't agree with the reasoning expressed in this in this discussion. I understand that some of the issues are already in implementation, and am on a couple of the teams working on them. And of course those things can't be implemented until they are ready. But that is normally the case after bylaws changes, the changes take time to implement, and some of the implementation is sometimes gated by other events. In a complex bylaw change, it might take a while for all of the implementation and deployment to be complete. I understood that. I did not suggest or ever fantasize about two different sets of bylaws, one that could be implemented immediately and one that had to wait. That would have been absurd and I do not understand how someone came up with that interpretation. What I did expect was that implementation work would begin with the decision, with those things that could be implemented in the near future being deployed when ready, and those things that needed more implementation preparation or that were gated by some exogenous factor, being deployed when they were ready. Of course some would not be ready until NTIA's decision was made or even after. But that is not the prevailing blocking issue for most. Whereas what we have is ongoing implementation work, with those things that may be ready, being shelved before deployment as they are all gated by NTIA's decision or some future community/Board process in the event that NTIA is unable to decide in the transition's favor.. But I now also understand how wrong my understanding of the Board's actual plan was. I am not going to argue about this, i think it is unfortunate, but 1 step forward 1/2 step back is the way this dance often goes, and I should just dance with the rest of the happy parade for the half step progress. (with apologies to Eberhard) Yippee, the Board agreed with the outcome of the community's CCWG hard work! Moving on: And I do appreciate the Board's intent to act in the spirit of the new bylaws in the meantime, even though I must say, I am not sure I understand what that means. For example: - what version of the mission, commitments and core values will be the operation view for ICANN - will the community have a say in the approval of the new articles beyond the normal comment period contributions? - will any of the accountability changes , such as ombudsman role or wider scope in reconsideration be applicable? - what time tables are we on for the AOC type reviews? Are we negotiating the switch over to bylaws with NTIA, I suppose that has to be gated on their decisions. Are any of these review that do start now under the old AOC rules or the new rules? Will they be able to switch rules once the bylaws are deployed? - while the new procedures for the IRP are not set, is the CEP affected? How does any of this affect decsion that various IRP panels are currently working on? how about new IRP panels whse operation will span the change in Bylaws. Also, how do we start WS2 work if we do not know which of the WS1 changes will be implemented, should NTIA decide against transition? I suppose we can just muddle (or is that stumble) along, but these are the practical issues that are concerning me this morning. I am sure I and others will think of more. We have the new bylaws, but we don't, I do not understand how we proceed in so many areas. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Hello Avri,
Whereas what we have is ongoing implementation work, with those things that may be ready, being shelved before deployment as they are all gated by NTIA's decision or some future community/Board process in the event that NTIA is unable to decide in the transition's favor.
I don't think there will be much difference in terms of timing. There are lots of pieces to get done in the next few months, and I am sure the staff will be able to provide an update for the Helsinki meeting on all the activities underway. The staff are proceeding with implementation and the goal is to have everything ready before 1 October 2016. We are also expecting that the community in turn will work on its processes to appoint people to the various new bodies described in the bylaws. I expect we will hear soon from the NTIA if there are any aspects that need to be adjusted. If there are any adjustments needed I don't think we collectively will be waiting until 1 Oct to make them. Regards, Bruce Tonkin
Dear All It is pity and painful that some people are prejudging the results and tom now thinking of fallback position Kavousd Sent from my iPhone
On 30 May 2016, at 03:24, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> wrote:
Hello Avri,
Whereas what we have is ongoing implementation work, with those things that may be ready, being shelved before deployment as they are all gated by NTIA's decision or some future community/Board process in the event that NTIA is unable to decide in the transition's favor.
I don't think there will be much difference in terms of timing. There are lots of pieces to get done in the next few months, and I am sure the staff will be able to provide an update for the Helsinki meeting on all the activities underway.
The staff are proceeding with implementation and the goal is to have everything ready before 1 October 2016. We are also expecting that the community in turn will work on its processes to appoint people to the various new bodies described in the bylaws.
I expect we will hear soon from the NTIA if there are any aspects that need to be adjusted. If there are any adjustments needed I don't think we collectively will be waiting until 1 Oct to make them.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
I agree. -J On 30/05/2016, 07:32, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Arasteh" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All It is pity and painful that some people are prejudging the results and tom now thinking of fallback position Kavousd
Sent from my iPhone
On 30 May 2016, at 03:24, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> wrote:
Hello Avri,
Whereas what we have is ongoing implementation work, with those things that may be ready, being shelved before deployment as they are all gated by NTIA's decision or some future community/Board process in the event that NTIA is unable to decide in the transition's favor.
I don't think there will be much difference in terms of timing. There are lots of pieces to get done in the next few months, and I am sure the staff will be able to provide an update for the Helsinki meeting on all the activities underway.
The staff are proceeding with implementation and the goal is to have everything ready before 1 October 2016. We are also expecting that the community in turn will work on its processes to appoint people to the various new bodies described in the bylaws.
I expect we will hear soon from the NTIA if there are any aspects that need to be adjusted. If there are any adjustments needed I don't think we collectively will be waiting until 1 Oct to make them.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ 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
Hello Alan,
Given the time line we have been on, it would have made absolutely no sense to devote time to creating a set of Bylaws presuming the transition, and a separate set presuming no transition.
Yes - that is essentially the discussion we had - whether to create different versions with different start dates etc. It was thought best to have a fully complete set of bylaws for the scenario that we have all been working towards.
presume that if the transition does fail, we will revisit these Bylaws, extract the parts that no longer apply, and move ahead with the accountability measures.
That is correct. There are a range of scenarios including - renewing the current NTIA agreement, creating a new agreement with different terms, and allowing the transition to occur. We are awaiting the report from NTIA as the next key piece of information. Any changes to the new bylaws that take into account any feedback we all receive from the US Government will go through the full community review process. Our next step is begin work on the implementation of the new bylaws, as assuming we get a positive report from the NTIA in the next month or two, the NTIA will still need to see that the bylaws are ready for implementation by around August. This involves setting up the various entities - e.g the Empowered Community nonprofit association, the IRP standing panel, the detailed rules and procedures for the new IRP, the customer standing committee, etc. There is a lot of work still to be done in the next 3 months or so to get ready for full implementation of these bylaws. In the meantime we should follow as much of the new procedures as possible. E.g. when the ICANN Board approves the budget it should notify the SOs and ACs, and they can certainly get together and inform the Board if they feel the budget should be rejected. Regards, Bruce Tonkin
participants (6)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Alberto Soto -
Arasteh -
avri doria -
Bruce Tonkin -
James Gannon