Milton is correct in that this is an issue that is both critical to the transition and not addressed by the CWG, and I believe not addressable solely by the CWG.

There are a two obvious possible ways the issue can be addressed:

1. The NTIA amends the Cooperative Agreement to require Verisign to publish changes submitted to it by IANA. Perhaps IANA would have to be added as a signatory to that agreement.

2. The NTIA cancels the Cooperative Agreement effective the time of transition and instructs ICANN/PTI to enter into an agreement with Verisign prior to that time.

Perhaps there are other options.

None can be done without NTIA taking some action, and to what extent ICANN/PTI need to be involved will depend on how the NTIA chooses to proceed. What it decides may well be influences by political issues in Washington.

I believe that the way forward is for the CWG Co-Chairs to contact the NTIA and ask for either information on how they plan to proceed so that we can take the appropriate steps (if any), or to confirm that the issue is, for the moment, fully under their control and that they will take the appropriate measures to ensure that the Root Zone Maintainer is properly contracted and instructed post-transition. With that information in hand, the CWG can confirm to the ICG that 1150, Section 2 is under control.

Milton, I would be glad to attempt to address "requirements of [] multiple annexes of the transition proposal", but could the you or the ICG please be more specific. That reference covers 76 pages  of text in the ICG document.

Alan


At 02/10/2015 05:30 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:

All:
 
I have looked over the proposed response to RZM question 1 and would have to reject what is proposed and offer this alternative.
 
No, the Verisign-ICANN proposal does not meet the requirements of 1150 Sections 2 and multiple annexes of the transition proposal, because it only addresses the NTIA authorization role and does not address the nature of the agreement that would be required to ensure that PTI's zone file modifications are implemented by Verisign.
 
The current draft asserts that only the NTIA can address the post-transition relationship between Verisign and PTI and ICANN. This is incorrect. It is true that only NTIA can modify the Cooperative Agreement with Verisign. But future Verisign-ICANN or PTI-Verisign relationships, contractual or otherwise, are not part of the cooperative agreement. NTIA cannot be suddenly given the responsibility of determining how ICANN, PTI and the RZM relate in the future, any more than we can ask it to define the nature of the CSC or the board structure of PTI. This seems obvious to me, perhaps others can explain why they think this critical part of the transition cannot be addressed by the CWG. I also find it interesting how the proposed response simply ignores the ?multiple annexes of part 1? aspect of the request.
 
I realize that as an ICG member, being part of the body that posed the question, I am also proposing a response. But I am forced to do that because the proposed response really does not answer the question; indeed, it seems to be intent on avoiding it. And at this stage in the game, we want to avoid another round of questions that would inevitably occur if you fail to actually answer the question.
 
--MM
 
 
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2015 8:14 PM
To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Responses to ICG Questions
 
Dear all,
 
Following the call today, Marika and I have reviewed the responses to the ICG Questions and prepared a redline and clean version for your review. We received some text from Alan Greenberg for the RZM questions and some text from Donna Austin for the .ARPA/CSC question. To summarize our edits, please refer to the notes from the call:
 
3. ICG Questions - review of draft responses
 

Summary of current status on ICG questions ACTIONS  
Best,
Grace
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship