Dear Mister Chairman, First, would you be so kind to pass my apologies to my cc colleagues and ccNSO fellows for not being able to be present with you all this time. Please, find also hereafter my report about the IANA WG : I would appreciate if you could relay it to ccNSO members when appropriate over the ccNSO meeting. About the IANA WG : - the most recent activity in the IANA Working Group was in testing the new Root Zone Management (RZM) interface that IANA planed to provide to ccs for managing their data in the IANA repository. An interim testing report was presented in Paris and is visible on line: https://par.icann.org/files/paris/guillard-ianawg-eiana_24Jun08.pdf The RZM test platform was shut down on Friday 13 June by IANA, so was the testing. - a work plan for the IANA WG was also presented to the community in Paris for future work and is visible on line : https://par.icann.org/files/paris/guillard-ianawg-workplan_24Jun08.pdf In essence, the proposal was to set up a platform for ccs to act collectively to improve the IANA service offered to them, under the ccNSO umbrella. A list of various current ongoing issues to work on was also proposed. We didn't receive any input about this proposal that could make us think that such an energy deployed by the ccNSO to work on IANA would provide any value to anyone. - The two last exchanges that happened in the IANA working goup mailing list were : 1/ the 5th of august 2008, a letter posted by the DOC to ICANN that clarifies the DOC position regarding "the management of the root zone". This letter can be found on line : http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2008/ICANN_080730.pdf Nobody in the IANA WG felt any need to react or to raise any issue with regard to this letter. 2/ the second thing that was brung to IANA WG members attention was the consultation organised in october 2008 by the NTIA about DNSSEC and the issue of signing the root, and that can also be found online : http://www.ntia.doc.gov/DNS/DNSSEC.html Although the IANA WG had undertaken activities in the area (see the "IANA WG DNSsec briefing" paper : http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/ccnso-iana-wg-dnssec-paper-04feb08.pdf ) nobody in the IANA WG has indicated a whish or a need to participate to this consultation. - May I add that over our recent IANA WG conf call, that was organised the 25th february 2009, Kim Davies has reported about its multiple and frequent individual contacts with various ccs to deal with specific issues of interests for those ccs : we understood that these direct communications were the best and most efficient way for IANA to deal with ccs about various issues of interest to ccs. That's all what I see to report about IANA WG activities over the past months. Considering the IANA structure and the way IANA organizes its work related to ccs, Considering also the level of activity in the IANA Working Group over the past months, After consultation of IANA WG members, and as already indicated to the Council, I therefore recommend to the ccNSO the closure of the IANA Working Group. Whatever the decision of the ccNSO will be about the continuation or the cessation of this working group, may I add that I'm proud and happy to have served the community in providing another channel and approach on IANA issues and service, and also to have supported the the past few years the improvement of the service that IANA provides to ccs. That was especially a particular pleasure for me to work and share views with competent colleagues from everywhere in the world, and also to support the hard and not easy work of the IANA staff. Kindest regards, --- Olivier Guillard