[ALAC] Important ALAC Survey About IANA Stewardship Transition Naming Issues

ICANN At-Large Staff staff at atlarge.icann.org
Thu Nov 13 03:32:54 UTC 2014

Dear All,

Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Chair of the IANA Issues Working Group and Vice Chair of the ALAC has asked that a survey be sent to the members of the IANA Issues Working Group, as well as the ALAC working list. You may access the survey at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/C5CNWG9. Kindly see the introduction of the survey below.

The CWG on IANA Stewardship Transition Naming Issues (CWG) will have a face-to-face meeting from Wednesday 19 November to Thursday 20 November. Our five ALAC representatives in this working group need to have a coordinated point of view BEFORE that date.

First, we need to make a decision on two initial over-arching questions related solely to Naming Issues:
1. Should the US Government Stewardship oversight of the IANA function be replaced by a new Oversight Body, or should it be replaced by a mechanism for oversight? (Please note that policy development will remain in ICANN; here we are speaking of operational oversight, making sure that the IANA functions are run according to its defined procedures.)
2. If the CWG decides to create an Oversight Body, should this body be IN ICANN or INDEPENDENT of ICANN.

Three proposals for an Oversight Body are on the table for discussion:
(1) creating this body within ICANN - a committee that would be consist of ICANN community members
(2) creating this body in a subsidiary of ICANN - a committee housed in a semi-independent organisation that would be a subsidiary of ICANN
(3) creating this body in an entirely independent and new organisation outside of ICANN

The three proposals are further detailed in this survey, which divides the proposal into sections based on their individual segments. Please be so kind to read the segments carefully and point out which ones you would favor. Please note that you do not need to favor segments from the same proposal. Also, if you would like to see some combination of segments across the proposals, or have other suggestions, you may elaborate on your idea in the comment sections.

If you don't support the creation of an Oversight Body for the naming related IANA Functions, please still complete the rest of the survey with the assumption that an Oversight Body would be created. In that way, our representatives on the CWG can have a fall-back position to work with if the CWG decides to go ahead with creating an Oversight Body. Please note that the questions marked with the asterisk sign are mandatory.

The three proposals are available at: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49361666/StrawmanMatrix.pdf

If you have any questions prior to answering this survey, do not hesitate to ask them on either alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org or iana-issues at atlarge-lists.icann.org.


Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew
ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC
E-mail: staff at atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff at atlarge.icann.org>
Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge>
Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge>

More information about the ALAC mailing list