[Chapter-delegates] [FYI] ISOC position on the ICANN Joint Project Agreement

Holly Raiche h.raiche at internode.on.net
Thu Feb 7 16:49:09 PST 2008 

Hi everyone

Just for everyone's information, I have attached in PDF format (sorry  
if that's inaccessible for people - happy to send another version to  
anyone who asks) the ISOC-AU submission.  As i explained in an email  
to Bill, the feedback from our discussion list was not in favour of  
continued US contractual arrangements with ICANN.  Our submission did  
pick up on the submission written by Peter Thrush, but really, in the  
end, asked two simple questions.  If ICANN has put in place  
structures and processes to achieve the 10 'responsibilities' (which  
are more like corporate governance ongoing objectives than as  
'achievements) then what additional reasons are there for  
continuation of  the JPA?  And if the US plays some additional role  
or roles - does that not detract from everyone's agreed goal of an  
independent, private sector multi-stakeholder ICANN managed in the  
interests of all internet users?

Happy reading

  Kind regards

Holly Raiche
Executive Director,
Internet Society of Australia (ISOC-AU)
ed at isoc-au.org.au
Mob: 0412 688 544
Ph: (02) 9436 2149

The Internet is For Everyone

On 08/02/2008, at 5:50 AM, Veni Markovski wrote:

> Bill,
> We are disappointed that ISOC wants the JPA comtinued.
> We are working on our own submission, but it is very muchb in support
> of Peter Dengate Thrush letter to the NTIA, which can be found on the
> ICANN site.
>
> Hope to see you in Delhi, but given the fact that you're sending
> ISOC's position a week before the deadline, which gives little, if
> any, space for improvement, I hope you'll make it clear that this is
> the position of ISOC - Reston, and has not been supported by the
> chapters, which are not co-signing it.
>
> Best,
> Veni
>
>
>
> On 2/7/08, Bill Graham <graham at isoc.org> wrote:
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> In advance of the ICANN meeting in Delhi next week, I would like to
>> share with you an overview of the comments ISOC is planning to submit
>> to the United States Department of Commerce Notice of Inquiry on the
>> mid-term review of the Joint Project Agreement (JPA) between DoC and
>> ICANN.    This position is based on ISOC principles and builds on  
>> past
>> submissions.  We continue to support a transition to a private sector
>> model for administration of the domain name system, and we  
>> continue to
>> be supportive of ICANN's efforts as they evolve to this model.
>>
>> When the JPA was created in September 2006 it had two parts:
>> ·      the agreement itself and
>>
>> ·      an annex written by the ICANN Board.
>>
>>
>> The annex contained 10 commitments that the Board voluntarily made to
>> the US government.  The present mid-term review was also promised in
>> the JPA.
>>
>> Some, including ICANN itself, seem to think it is possible that the
>> JPA could be terminated at the mid-term.  Others see obstacles –
>> political and otherwise.  - Irrespective of whether early termination
>> is possible.  For three major reasons, ISOC's position is that the  
>> JPA
>> should continue until its end in 2009 so that ICANN can prepare  
>> itself
>> for private sector management.  Briefly those reasons are:
>>
>> (1)  ICANN has done a lot in the first half of the JPA with  
>> respect to
>> advancing work on the JPA responsibilities in areas such as
>> transparency, to making progress in other key areas such as IDNs, and
>> working to improve stability and security.  The next 18 months  
>> will be
>> an opportunity to put these into operation and ensure that the new
>> mechanisms are adequate to meet community expectations.  This is
>> essential for the stability of the organization post-JPA, and is
>> central to strong engaged community support – a central tenet of  
>> the
>> private sector model envisaged for ICANN.
>>
>> (2)  ICANN needs to develop a vision or plan for what it will look
>> like and how it will work without the US government oversight.   This
>> will need community support and buy-in and must be developed within
>> ICANN's processes, following principles of openness, transparency and
>> accountability.  The community needs to understand how ICANN plans to
>> operate and evolve in the absence of the USG oversight role.  That
>> needs to be elaborated & test-driven over the next year(s) in  
>> order to
>> be credible, to gain support, and before various constituencies  
>> should
>> be comfortable with ending the JPA.
>>
>> (3) In the 2006 DoC proceedings, both ISOC and IAB strongly expressed
>> the need for all parties to recognize that the protocol parameter
>> function carried out by ICANN is on behalf of and performed fully
>> under the IETF's direction.  ICANN's responsibilities for these
>> assignments is therefore different from ICANN's other  
>> responsibilities
>> within the IANA function.  In the next 18 months, concrete steps must
>> be taken to recognize this, and to ensure that the IETF's protocol
>> parameter needs will continue to be met to its satisfaction,
>> regardless of any changes that may be made in ICANN's relationship
>> with the DoC.
>>
>> The deadline for making the formal submission to the US government is
>> February 15, and this summary of our position is provided as
>> background for our discussions during the ICANN meeting.  I am aware
>> that some Chapters and individual members have already made
>> submissions to the DoC – some not entirely agreement with the  
>> position
>> we are planning to put forward.  I think it will be important for  
>> ISOC
>> members speaking publicly in Delhi to identify themselves and make it
>> clear that they speak on their own or their Chapter's behalf.  If you
>> do not agree with the formal ISOC position outlined above, I would
>> also encourage you to state that as well.  Because of the short time
>> remaining before the deadline for comments, I don't think it will be
>> possible to engage in discussion on the chapter delegates' list.  But
>> I look forward to meeting many of you at ICANN and welcome any
>> comments you may want to email me off list at graham at isoc.org.
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Bill
>> ========================
>> Bill Graham
>> Global Strategic Engagement
>> The Internet Society
>> graham at isoc.org
>> tel +1.613.231.8543
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20080208/9d77c355/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ICANN-JPA.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 136394 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20080208/9d77c355/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20080208/9d77c355/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Chapter-delegates mailing list