[lac-discuss-es] [SEEKING INPUTS} US Departmentof Commerce IANA Notice of Inquiry

cveraq en gmail.com cveraq en gmail.com
Jue Mar 3 15:45:16 UTC 2011


Podriamos abrir un hilo de discusion aqui? 

Para empexar algun miembro con mas conocimiento podria realizar una breve explicacion del tema y la problematica relacionada..

Ojala sea posible

Carlos Vera
------------ próxima parte ------------
Tema muy importante, en el que opino deberiamos participar todos

Saludos

Sebastian Bellagamba
bellagamba en isoc.org
-------------------------------
Manager - Oficina Regional para America Latina y el Caribe
Regional Bureau Manager for Latin America and the Caribbean
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Internet Society
www.isoc.org



Begin forwarded message:

> From: Bill Graham <graham en isoc.org>
> Date: 2 March 2011 4:57:59 PM GMT-02:00
> To: Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates en elists.isoc.org>, =
isoc-members-announce en elists.isoc.org
> Cc: ISOC Chapter Support <chapter-support en isoc.org>
> Subject: [Chapter-delegates] [SEEKING INPUTS} US Department of =
Commerce IANA Notice of Inquiry
>=20
> Dear Chapter Delegates and Members,
>=20
> As you are probably aware, the Government of the United States =
released its long-awaited Notice of Inquiry on the IANA functions on =
Friday last week.  I'm attaching a pdf version that is easier to read =
than the Federal Register version on their web site <See: =
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/>.  The deadline for comments is 31 March 2011, =
so we need to begin developing our response now.
>=20
> The evolution of the IANA function is an issue of immediate and great =
interest to all parts of ISOC and our companion organizations.  I am =
seeking views from our membership on this important topic to use as =
inputs when developing the ISOC response to the NOI.  I will also be =
drawing on the Board discussions of the IANA function that have taken =
place over the past few years.  And finally, I will be coordinating with =
the other I* organizations.  I do not believe we should try to develop a =
joint response to DoC, but we will want to ensure there are no surprises =
and, ideally, that there is broad general agreement in what we provide =
to the decision making process.
>=20
> It is my believe that the US government is sincerely hoping to get a =
broad range of responses from the US and elsewhere with concrete =
suggestions for improvement of the way the IANA function is handled.  =
For example, they are hoping to hear clear statements about what this =
community wants; e.g., whether and why there should be changes to how =
the .arpa and/or the .int are treated in the contract, what should be =
the arrangements for the protocol parameters, etc.  If the Internet =
technical community would like to see the US government make changes, we =
need to participate in this process to build a record of those =
recommendations.  Thus I encourage you to send me your inputs by end of =
day Friday, 18 March, 2011.
>=20
> The NOI is quite detailed, as you will see.  It describes the IANA =
function, and then goes on to ask questions in six areas.  To =
paraphrase, those are:
>=20
> 1/ Whether the interdependent technical functions performed under the =
IANA should continue to be treated as interdependent, or if there should =
be changes to the present grouping?
>=20
> 2/ Recognizing that other Internet technical organizations' policies =
(e.g., IETF, IAB, RIRs, ccTLDs) impact on the performance of the IANA =
functions, should those be referred to and specified in the IANA =
functions contract and how?
>=20
> 3/ Should there be changes in the handling of root zone management =
requests requests pertaining to ccTLDs to address the concerns of some =
governments and ccTLD operators?
>=20
> 4/ Are the current performance metrics and reporting by the IANA =
functions operator adequate, or should there be changes?
>=20
> 5/ Are there improvements that should be made to the IANA functions =
contract to better address the needs of users of the IANA functions?  =
Here the NOI specifically asks if additional information on the =
performance and administration of the IANA function would make the =
process more transparent?
>=20
> 6/ Should additional security considerations or enhancements be =
included in the requirements in the IANA functions contract?
>=20
> In every case, the NOI requests *specific* information and *specific* =
suggestions for improvements in the IANA contract.  This may be an area =
where ISOC can contribute to the process in a very positive way.  I =
would especially like to hear from you if you are in some direct way a =
participant or user of the IANA functions, and if you have any specific =
experience that indicates a need for improvement or alteration of the =
contract, and if so, what your specific recommendations would be.  That =
kind of input would improve the depth and credibility of the ISOC =
response.  Of course, as always, you are welcome to make your own direct =
comments to the process, but I would still very much appreciate hearing =
about your experiences and views.
>=20
> While I have not prepared text for the submission, in general, I would =
like to see ISOC explain how important it is to rely on the native =
Internet institutions to play appropriate roles where their expertise =
contributes to the smooth functioning of the Internet overall.  Thus it =
is important that the roles of the IETF, IAB, RIRs, and ccTLD operators =
be recognized in the system, and that there is a need to build =
international confidence in how the IANA function is operated and =
administered.  That includes the need to be more open, transparent and =
thus accountable in the administration of the process, to match the =
openness and transparency provided by the operator's extensive =
reporting.  I also foresee suggesting that the stability of the IANA =
functions could be improved under different process than the current =
redrawing and renewing of relatively short term IANA functions =
contracts. =20
>=20
> I hope that you will read the full NOI, and I look forward to hearing =
your views on the questions it asks, your experiences, and your =
recommendations for improvement.
>=20
> Once again, to make it possible for me to prepare the ISOC input, =
please send me your inputs before end of day on March 18, 2011 or =
earlier if possible.
>=20
> Thank you in advance
>=20
> Bill=20
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates en elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates



Mensaje enviado desde mi terminal BlackBerry® de Porta

-----Original Message-----
From: Sebastian Bellagamba <bellagamba en isoc.org>
Sender: deleg-lac-bounces en elists.isoc.org
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 09:39:41 
To: <deleg-lac en elists.isoc.org>
Reply-To: deleg-lac en elists.isoc.org
Subject: [Deleg-lac] Fwd: [Chapter-delegates] [SEEKING INPUTS} US Department
	of Commerce IANA Notice of Inquiry

_______________________________________________
Deleg-lac mailing list
Deleg-lac en elists.isoc.org
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/deleg-lac



Más información sobre la lista de distribución lac-discuss-es