I have to come in on Chris's side here. I recently wrote to ICANN regarding 'unintentional response bias' in another survey, and I'll rehearse one particular point . Surveys are like referenda; the outcome is usually dependent on the form of the question. On 10/31/2014 11:59 AM, Chris Disspain wrote:
Peter,
Before .au answers the survey, some questions.
5.1 Is there a need for an external (to ICANN) IANA oversight mechanism to replace the transactional oversight provided by NTIA's present role? (In this role, the NTIA approved the change requests for the root zone.)
*In respect to all changes authorised by a ccTLD even if those changes are made as part of an automated process? Changes that amount to a change of manager? An appeals mechanism to ensure that revocation and delegation doesn’t occur without an oversight?*
5.2 Is there a need for an external (to ICANN) IANA oversight mechanism to replace the contractual oversight provided by NTIA's present role? (This allowed the NTIA to reassign the contract if needed.)
*I assume this means a body that could ‘re-let’ the contract. Is that correct? If so, on what basis? Cross ICANN constituency (ccNSO, gNSO, ALAC and GAC)? A wider community? Just the ccTLDs?*
6. If a new oversight mechanism is to be established (replacing the oversight executed by the NTIA), who should represent the ccTLDs interest in such a mechanism?
*An oversight mechanism to ‘re-let’ the contract or the ‘tick box’ approval of changes or both? Or an appeals mechanism to cover revocation and delegation? *
8. It is important to keep policy making functions separate from IANA functions
*What policy? Policy relating to RFC 1591? Policy relating to gTLDs? *
9. The ultimate authority for entries in the IANA database should be
*Do you mean the ultimate authority for checking the entries? Or resolving disputes in respect to entries? Or the entity that can refuse to authorise changes? Or something else?*
10. If the IANA operator does not perform well or abuses its position, the affected ccTLD should have the opportunity to an independent and binding appeal process.
*In respect to service levels? In respect to a revocation and delegation? *
12. What do you believe to be the most appropriate forum to develop objective technical standards for the operational requirements for the IANA functions
*Do you mean the technical standards currently governed by the contract with the USG or something else?*
Cheers,
Chris Disspain|Chief Executive Officer
.au Domain Administration Ltd
T: +61 3 8341 4111|F: +61 3 8341 4112
E:ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> |W:www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/>
auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator
*Important Notice****- *This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
On 31 Oct 2014, at 20:08 , Peter Van Roste <peter@centr.org <mailto:peter@centr.org>> wrote:
Hi Everyone, On behalf of the ccTLD representatives in the CWG, the regional organisations are sending out a survey on the IANA stewardship transition. The goal of this survey is to understand your views and expectations of how IANA should be structured in the future. The survey can be found here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/IANA_ccTLDs(English) https://es.surveymonkey.com/s/ccTLD_IANA_ES(Spanish) https://fr.surveymonkey.com/s/ccTLD_IANA_FR(French) https://ru.surveymonkey.com/s/ccTLD_IANA_RU(Russian) - will be available shortly https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ccTLD_IANA_CN(Chinese) -will be available shortly If you have any questions about the survey, feel free to contact any of the CWG representatives (in CC) or myself. We need your responses by November 12^th COB UTC. In addition I want to share the details of a webinar that will take place on Tuesday*November 4^th at 8 - 9 AM UTC (9 – 10 AM CET)*. The webinar will provide an overview of the state of things and the background for the survey and allow for questions on the survey. This webinar will also be held for other regions, so if this time is inconvenient to you, let me know and I’ll provide you with the details of the alternatives. Dial in numbers: http://www.adigo.com/icann/ Conference ID: 2838 Adobe Room: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/cwg-istp/
* If you need dial out assistance, please letkristina.nordstrom@icann.org <mailto:kristina.nordstrom@icann.org>know as soon as possible. * Two-way audio will be available in the adobe room * You do not need to RSVP, just show up!
I would strongly encourage you to attend the webinar and have a look at the survey before. Your input is crucial. Thank you in advance for your responses! Regards, Peter *<image001.jpg>***
*Peter Van Roste*** *General Manager*
<image002.png>
**
*CENTR - Belliardstraat 20, 1040 Brussels, Belgium*** *tel +32 2 627 5550 - fax +32 2 627 5559* *www.centr.org <http://www.centr.org/>****– twitter: centrnews*