| c1.txt | c2.txt | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The coordination group has one deliverable, a proposal to the NTIA | The IANA transition coordination group (ICG) has one deliverable, a | |||
| regarding the transition of NTIA���s stewardship of IANA functions to | proposal to the U.S. Commerce Department National Telecommunications | |||
| the multi-stakeholder community. | and Information Administration (NTIA) regarding the transition of | |||
| NTIA���s stewardship of the IANA functions to the Internet community. | ||||
| The coordination group performs, as its name implies, coordination, | The group���s mission is to coordinate the development of a proposal | |||
| among the communities that are affected by IANA functions. The IANA | among the communities affected by the IANA functions. The IANA | |||
| parameters fall into three categories: domain names, number resources, | parameters fall into three categories: domain names, number resources, | |||
| and other protocol parameters. While there is some overlap among these | and other protocol parameters. While there is some overlap among these | |||
| categories, they have their own communities of interest; it is easiest | categories, each poses distinct organizational, operational and | |||
| to have these communities proceed on the work in parallel. | technical issues, and each tends to have distinct communities of | |||
| interest and expertise. For those reasons it is best to have work on | ||||
| The coordination group has three main tasks: | the three categories of IANA parameters proceed autonomously in | |||
| parallel and be based in the respective communities of interest. | ||||
| (i) Ensuring that the relevant communities are working on their part | ||||
| of the transition plans | ||||
| This involves informing, tracking progress, and highlighting the | ||||
| results or remaining issues. | ||||
| The role of a coordination group member during this phase is just | ||||
| - providing status updates about the progress of his or her | ||||
| community in developing their component, - coordinating which | ||||
| community will develop a transition proposal for each area of | ||||
| overlap (e.g., special-use registry) - reflecting to the rest of | ||||
| the coordination group the consensus within the member's own | ||||
| community. | ||||
| (ii) Assemble a complete proposal for the transition. | The coordination group has four main tasks: | |||
| This can begin when the reports from the coordination group members | (i) Act as liaison to the three communities of interest (names, | |||
| from each of the three communities come back with an answer of, "Yes, | numbers, protocols) (ii) Assess the outputs of the three communities | |||
| there is consensus within my community in support of the complete | of interest for workability, compatibility and consensus (iii) | |||
| proposal." | Assemble a complete proposal for the transition (iv) Information | |||
| sharing and public communication | ||||
| The assembly effort involves taking the proposals for the different | Describing each in more detail: | |||
| components and verifying that they fulfil the intended full scope, | ||||
| meet the intended criteria, that there are no missing parts, and that | ||||
| the whole fits together. | ||||
| The CG might at some point detect problems with the component | (i) Liaison Members of the ICG will ensure that the communities from | |||
| proposals. At that point the role of the CG is to communicate that | which they are drawn are working on their part of the transition | |||
| back to the relevant communities so that they (the relevant | plans. This involves informing them of requirements and schedules, | |||
| communities) can address the issues. | tracking progress, and highlighting the results or remaining issues. | |||
| The role of a coordination group member during this phase is to | ||||
| provide status updates about the progress of his or her community in | ||||
| developing their component, and to coordinate which community will | ||||
| develop a transition proposal for each area of overlap (e.g., | ||||
| special-use registry) | ||||
| This step concludes when the coordination group achieves rough | (ii) Assessment When the group receives output from the independent | |||
| consensus that all conditions have been met. | groups it will discuss and assess their workability, assess their | |||
| compatibility and interoperability with the proposals of the other | ||||
| groups, and verify their levels of support in the respective | ||||
| communities. The ICG might at some point detect problems with the | ||||
| component proposals. At that point the role of the ICG is to | ||||
| communicate that back to the relevant communities so that they (the | ||||
| relevant communities) can address the issues. In assessing consensus, | ||||
| the coordination group will rely to some extent on its members to | ||||
| reflect to the rest of the group the support levels within the | ||||
| member's own community, but the group is also authorized to engage in | ||||
| independent assessments, such as public notice and comment periods. | ||||
| (iii) Information sharing and communication. | (iii) Assembling and submitting a complete proposal The assembly | |||
| effort involves taking the proposals for the different components and | ||||
| verifying that they fulfil the intended scope, meet the intended | ||||
| criteria, that there are no missing parts, and that the whole fits | ||||
| together. The ICG will then develop a draft final proposal that | ||||
| achieves consensus within the ICG itself. The ICG will then put this | ||||
| proposal up for public comment involving a reasonable period of time | ||||
| for reviewing the draft proposal, analyzing and preparing supportive | ||||
| or critical comments. The ICG will then review these comments and | ||||
| determine whether modifications are required. If not, and the | ||||
| coordination group agrees, the proposal will be submitted to NTIA. If | ||||
| changes are required to fix problems or achieve broader support, the | ||||
| ICG is authorized to make minor amendments in consultation with the | ||||
| affected communities of interest. If, in the ICG���s opinion, broad | ||||
| public support for the proposal as articulated by the NTIA is not | ||||
| present, the parts of the proposal that are not supported return to | ||||
| the liaison phase. | ||||
| This should be performed continuously throughout the process. | (iv) Information sharing The ICG should serve as a central | |||
| clearinghouse for public information about the IANA stewardship | ||||
| transition process. Its secretariat should maintain an independent | ||||
| website, under its own domain, where status updates, meetings and | ||||
| notices are announced, proposals are stored, the ICG members are | ||||
| listed, etc. | ||||
| End of changes. 10 change blocks. | ||||
| 40 lines changed or deleted | 56 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||