Hi, Just to clarify something:
Q: What involvement has ICANN/IANA had and how committed are they to this?
A: Initially it appeared to us that ICANN was only going to engage at a senior executive level to insist that the SLA stays unchanged from that in place currently.
At no point (at least that I am aware of) have we ever insisted or even suggested the SLAs stay unchanged from what is in place currently. Indeed, given the process will be changing with the removal of NTIA from the root zone management loop, such a position would not make sense. My position, as the person responsible for the technical implementation of the transition, has been that we need to understand the services that are going to be provided before we can define the acceptable service levels for those services. I believe we also need to prioritize development to ensure the stuff that's critical for the IANA functions to operate post-transition are adjusted to deal with the post-IANA environment. Since we have existing SLAs, I'm uncomfortable with suggestions that significant revision to those SLAs must be in the critical path for the transition. The current plan, as I understand it, is that the community is developing a framework for the SLAs, and we (staff) will be developing a project plan that takes into account the various development projects, including software development and staff training necessary to implement the SLAs from CWG-Stewardship (and the Numbering and potentially the Protocol Parameter communities if they change their SLAs as part of the normal yearly process) that we believe will be necessary to implement the transition. I would also strongly encourage the CWG-Stewardship to include a process that facilitates a yearly revision of SLAs to adjust those SLAs to meet the changing Internet environment. Regards, -drc ICANN CTO