Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the RFP3B Call on 14 January are available here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51417868 <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51417868%20> Notes and Action Items 1. Welcome and roll call Adobe connect list as member present. No one on audio only 2. Background Specific concerns around Contract Co. two submissions explicit alternate proposals ( ALAC and AUDA) Purpose of Sub-working group Develop alternate proposal to "Frankfurt Proposal" Approach to tasks at hand Relationship to RFP 3 Convenient to use same terminology, however be mindful of evolution. Comment, MRT could be like a new Supporting Organization. IANA function to be overseen by similar committee like current Nominating Committee. Start with alternative for Contract Co. Steve Crocker: 4 pieces to puzzle 1. What mechanism should be in place 2. lack of clarity around what IANA Function is. IAAN Function is clerical function. Not policy decision. Decision to make delegation or re-delegation is outside. This is tool to make 3. lack of clarity of what separation. Decision to make what goes into root zone are made by ICANN, is it meaningful if clerical is outside 4. what are criteria to make judgment of separation Question what is minimal proposal to make this work Interpretation of IANA Function Contract: (Intended) Clear separation between policy decision and clerical action Upstream decision should not be interpreted as IANA decision Resistance to perception that IANA is operational. and what are for example new gTLDs is policy decision. Use IANA operational function as leverage of policy function. Policy development * Judgment within policy * Decision on Amazon or Vine are policy decision ( value decision). IANA process after decisions. * Independence from the Board: there should be some group that has unfettered access to function, alternate to NomCom, root signing process. Group could be CSC like. * Separation discussion is revisit of discussion 15 years ago. Signal for ICANN Board to look into calls for separation * Need for clean and clear distinction between policy and execution/operation. Policy definition is blurred band blurs discussion. Start with clear definition of IANA Function. * Focus discussion on ALAC and Auda proposal as starting point (one variant) * Comment Becky: IAP and other items are reflection of not getting at policy execution and not at operations on the other hand. Focusing on operations is starting point. * Comment AG on ALAC proposal: need for more details are needed to meet requirement of RFP 3 required by ICG.ALAC proposal principles far more important than details What should be focus of RFP 3B * Greg Shatan, coordinator RFP 3: Focusing on alternate approach without Contract Co, may ultimately change way how MRT and CSC are viewed. By focusing on all directly would slow down process overall. * Suggestion is to focus first on alternate for Contract Co and contract. Short term viable discussion on alternate of Contract Co. * Steve Crocker: Is focus on non-contracting co? this will not address core of the problem * Greg Shatan: start again with functional discussion. Structure follows function * Start of functional analysis: After understanding what IAN Functions are: determine specific risks/issues. (what if IANA does not follow instruction) or does not perform well, then look for mitigating measures. * The risks are in area of decision making area. The decisions should be out of IANA. After transition this should be clarified. * Background for agenda and proposal, based on comment and issues with raised in public comments focus on Contract Co. or go back ground work. * Suggestion by taking out Contract Co. as mechanism problem can be redefined, and mitigating * Duty to investigate all proposal and understanding ramifications of these proposals. Understanding benefits and down side, to inform the ccTLD and gTLD operators to make a reasoned decision. * Issue is where and by whom will be examination be done. RFP 4 should do stress test and understand ramifications. Purpose of RFP 3b is to build proposal that is build around alternative proposal RFP 3b. Functional analysis includes 3 aspects: clear about IANA Function , role of NTIA in relation to IAN Function and functional alternate to Contract Co Proposal for functional analysis - ICANN performs IANA function under contract, what is alternate? Auda proposal - Elements not to be addressed by this group (less relevant), such as CSC and MRT aspects, or rebid process. Current naming function operation done well. Naming function, is narrow this focuses approach. Contract Co approach is too broad. "Nuclear option", although causes may be highly unlikely they should be developed. Analogy and principle are similar to relation between Auda and Australian government. Suggested approach something like "golden bylaw" Definition of power Singular difference: a single government overseeing. This difference should drive to a different type of solution. Resolve issue what is discussed in one group or another If something goes wrong, first step is to have a discussion. Further if something goes really wrong, there will uproar and as a results in changes, next step is to secure No single government argument Focus must be actual functions and incentive to make it work, and reduce the risk of capture to capturing it. Need to define parameters the IANA Function needs to be performed and what will happen if not preformed adequately. Need to take have a look functions again Action Allan: look with staff at functional analysis to be presented to the group Specific reason for creation of this group: come up with a proposal without contract Co and contract. as alternative Next call to accommodate those whose who are in Frankfurt Action Allan: look with staff at functional analysis to be presented to the group The next call after Frankfurt is Wednesday 21 January - 21:00 - 23:00 UTC Kind regards, Brenda
