NTIA- An Update on the IANA Transition
Hello, Larry has just posted an update on the IANA transition and extension of ICANN contract. An item of the update is the proposal that addresses the administrative(middleman) role of NTIA in the update of the root. Although the CWG did not address this in its proposal due to scope, it highlights some high level principles (expectations) on this. It may be good to check if the ICANN/Verisign proposal meets such expectations. Regards http://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2015/update-iana-transition An Update on the IANA Transition August 17, 2015 by Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling The Internet’s global multistakeholder community has made tremendous progress in its work to develop a proposal to transition the historic stewardship role NTIA has played related to Internet’s domain name system (DNS). When we announced <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition-...> our intent in March 2014 to complete the privatization of the DNS, we noted that the base period of our contract with ICANN to perform technical functions related to the DNS, known as the IANA functions, expired on September 30, 2015. However, it has become increasingly apparent over the last few months that the community needs time to complete its work, have the plan reviewed by the U.S. Government and then implement it if it is approved. Accordingly, in May we asked the groups developing the transition documents how long it would take to finish and implement their proposals. After factoring in time for public comment, U.S. Government evaluation and implementation of the proposals, the community estimated it could take until at least September 2016 to complete this process. In response to their feedback, we informed Congress on Friday that we plan to extend our IANA contract with ICANN for one year to September 30, 2016. Beyond 2016, we have options to extend the contract for up to three additional years if needed. This one-year extension will provide the community with the time it needs to finish its work. The groups are already far along in planning the IANA transition and are currently taking comments on their IANA transition proposals. As we indicated in a recent Federal Register notice <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/fr_iana_transition_comment_n...>, we encourage all interested stakeholders to engage and weigh in on the proposals. In preparation for the implementation phase of the IANA stewardship transition, NTIA also asked Verisign and ICANN to submit a proposal detailing how best to remove NTIA’s administrative role associated with root zone management, which the groups working on the transition were not asked to address. We asked Verisign and ICANN to submit a proposal detailing how best to do this in a manner that maintains the security, stability and resiliency of the DNS. Under the current root zone management system, Verisign edits and distributes the root zone file after it has received authorization to do so from NTIA. Verisign and ICANN have developed a proposal <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/root_zone_administrator_prop...> that outlines a technical plan and testing regime for phasing out the largely clerical role NTIA currently plays in this process. The testing will occur in a parallel environment that will not disrupt the current operation of the root zone management system. These developments will help ensure that the IANA transition will be done in a manner that preserves the security and stability of the DNS. Cheers! -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* The key to understanding is humility - my view !
I think the CWG should do an assessment again the proposal for RZM to make sure that it doesn’t impact any of our work or require any substantive changes, my initial read indicates only one small change with regards to the RZM Authorisation step being removed, the proposal suggests replacing it with an authentication step by PTI which I would suggest is a prudent approach that the CWG should endorse. But I think a methodical analysis shouldn’t take long and would be good due diligence on our part. -James Gannon On 18 Aug 2015, at 08:31, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com<mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>> wrote: proposal<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/root_zone_administrator_prop...>
Certainly we need to do that. I have done a VERY brief review of the proposal. It seems to be in line with what DT-F proposed, and in fact is very similar to a proposal that DT-F considered, but ultimately put into the recommendation as something that could be considered post-transition to increase the robustness of the process. I have no knowledge of the process followed other than as described in the blog post, it was developed jointly by ICANN and Verisign. I cannot imagine that this was done without the involvement of the ICANN CTO, who was also working with DT-F. Alan At 18/08/2015 06:47 AM, James Gannon wrote:
I think the CWG should do an assessment again the proposal for RZM to make sure that it doesnât impact any of our work or require any substantive changes, my initial read indicates only one small change with regards to the RZM Authorisation step being removed, the proposal suggests replacing it with an authentication step by PTI which I would suggest is a prudent approach that the CWG should endorse. But I think a methodical analysis shouldnât take long and would be good due diligence on our part.
-James Gannon
On 18 Aug 2015, at 08:31, Seun Ojedeji <<mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
Hi, Just to mention that Milton wrote an interesting blog post summary about this proposal: http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/08/18/whats-going-on-between-ntia-ica... Inline with determining consistency with what DT-F proposed, it will be good to ask the question of whether the proposal shared by Larry will ultimately remove the administrative role NTIA. The current wording in the proposal does not make that clear and I think that would indeed determine if we are really done with stewardship transition or just scratching the surface. Regards Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 Kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 18 Aug 2015 08:31, "Seun Ojedeji" <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
Larry has just posted an update on the IANA transition and extension of ICANN contract. An item of the update is the proposal that addresses the administrative(middleman) role of NTIA in the update of the root. Although the CWG did not address this in its proposal due to scope, it highlights some high level principles (expectations) on this. It may be good to check if the ICANN/Verisign proposal meets such expectations.
Regards
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2015/update-iana-transition An Update on the IANA Transition August 17, 2015 by Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling
The Internet’s global multistakeholder community has made tremendous progress in its work to develop a proposal to transition the historic stewardship role NTIA has played related to Internet’s domain name system (DNS).
When we announced <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition-...> our intent in March 2014 to complete the privatization of the DNS, we noted that the base period of our contract with ICANN to perform technical functions related to the DNS, known as the IANA functions, expired on September 30, 2015. However, it has become increasingly apparent over the last few months that the community needs time to complete its work, have the plan reviewed by the U.S. Government and then implement it if it is approved.
Accordingly, in May we asked the groups developing the transition documents how long it would take to finish and implement their proposals. After factoring in time for public comment, U.S. Government evaluation and implementation of the proposals, the community estimated it could take until at least September 2016 to complete this process. In response to their feedback, we informed Congress on Friday that we plan to extend our IANA contract with ICANN for one year to September 30, 2016. Beyond 2016, we have options to extend the contract for up to three additional years if needed.
This one-year extension will provide the community with the time it needs to finish its work. The groups are already far along in planning the IANA transition and are currently taking comments on their IANA transition proposals. As we indicated in a recent Federal Register notice <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/fr_iana_transition_comment_n...>, we encourage all interested stakeholders to engage and weigh in on the proposals.
In preparation for the implementation phase of the IANA stewardship transition, NTIA also asked Verisign and ICANN to submit a proposal detailing how best to remove NTIA’s administrative role associated with root zone management, which the groups working on the transition were not asked to address. We asked Verisign and ICANN to submit a proposal detailing how best to do this in a manner that maintains the security, stability and resiliency of the DNS. Under the current root zone management system, Verisign edits and distributes the root zone file after it has received authorization to do so from NTIA. Verisign and ICANN have developed a proposal <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/root_zone_administrator_prop...> that outlines a technical plan and testing regime for phasing out the largely clerical role NTIA currently plays in this process. The testing will occur in a parallel environment that will not disrupt the current operation of the root zone management system.
These developments will help ensure that the IANA transition will be done in a manner that preserves the security and stability of the DNS.
Cheers! -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
The key to understanding is humility - my view !
participants (3)
-
Alan Greenberg -
James Gannon -
Seun Ojedeji