Cover letter to ICANN interim board
23 July 1999
Esther Dyson
Chair
ICANN Interim Board
Dear Ms Dyson,
We have pleasure in submitting to the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) the attached proposal relating to the formation of an
ICANN Address Supporting Organization (ASO). This proposal is being submitted to
ICANN by the existing Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), namely the American Registry
for Internet Numbers (ARIN), the Reseaux IP Europeens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE
NCC), and the Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC).
The proposal is the outcome of consideration of the role of ICANN
and the role of the ASO and the Address Council undertaken by the RIRs, their Boards or
Executive Committees, and their membership at large, and also includes the incorporation
of comment arising from a series of ICANN-sponsored public ASO discussion meetings through
the past 12 months.
There are a number of aspects of this proposal that we would like
to draw to ICANN's attention.
- The proposal does not include the incorporation of a separate
entity for the ASO. The mechanism proposed to establish the ASO is by the means of a
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between ICANN and the set of ICANN-approved RIRs. In
this we are following the organisational structures adopted with the DNS Support
Organization and the Protocol Support Organization.
- The proposal envisions the ability of ICANN to approve further
RIRs in the future, and proposes that such bodies add their signature to the ASO-enabling
MoU following ICANN's approval. An appendix to the proposal indicates a number of criteria
that we consider to be integral to an adopted process of approving further RIRs.
- The proposal establishes an Address Council as the means by
which the ASO will conduct its business, and proposes that each RIR signatory to the MoU
be permitted to appoint 3 individuals to this council.
- The Address Council is responsible for the appointment of three
Directors to the ICANN Board.
There are a number of salient features of this proposal that we
would also like to draw to ICANN's attention.
1. Open and Transparent operation of the ASO
- The Address Council will host a General Assembly once per year,
and will permit open participation to all interested individuals.
- All discussions of ASO business will be reported on a publicly
archived mailing list.
- Meeting announcements, agendas, and minutes will be made
publicly available in a timely fashion.
- Address Council members shall be selected following an open
call for nominations of interested individuals to serve on the Address Council, using an
open and transparent procedure.
- All communications between ICANN and the ASO will be made
public on the ICANN/ASO web site.
2. Separation of the functions of policy determination and
implementation
- No member of staff of an RIR is eligible to serve on the
Address Council or to be appointed to the ICANN Board.
- We note that policies of the existing RIRs are not determined
by the staff of the RIRs, but are set by the members of the RIRs. The individuals involved
in this process of membership-determined policy are not chosen through some random or
arbitrary process, but are the duly designated representatives of their respective
companies. Furthermore, these RIR policies include the holding of at least one annual
policy development meeting, open to all interested parties to both observe and comment. In
delegating functions and responsibilities to RIRs within the ASO, control of any of the
ASO functions is not being passed to a closed or unrepresentative process.
- We recommend such measures as being a vital component of ICANN
consideration relating to the approval of any additional RIRs.
3. Industry participation
- We note that no additional means of Internet Service Provider
(ISP) representation is provided within the proposed ASO structure. Given the open nature
of participation in the process of policy determination, and the structure of the RIRs as
a industry-based membership organisation, we are of the view that industry is well
represented and, importantly, well balanced, within the RIR policy forums. Furthermore, we
are of the view that any additional measures of inclusion of additional representation of
any particular industry sector within the ASO has the potential to bias the operation of
the ASO to assume positions supportive of only one sector of a broader constituency of
consumers of Internet address space.
4. At Large Participation
- We note the explicit provision for At Large participation in
the affairs of ICANN is through the selection of members of the Board by the At Large
ICANN constituency. We also note the ability of interested individuals to observe and
participate in the activities of the ASO and the Address Council through the General
Assembly, the open nominations process, and through the open policy development meetings
hosted by the RIRs. In consideration of these factors, no specific At Large membership of
the Address Council is included in this proposal. However, we note that this does not
preclude the processes adopted by the RIRs to appoint At Large nominations to the Address
Council.
In conclusion, we recommend this ASO proposal to ICANN, and
invite both ICANN and all other interested parties to consider and comment on this
proposal through the adopted ICANN procedures.
Submitted on behalf of the American Registry for Internet Numbers
(ARIN), the Reseaux IP Europeens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC), and the Asia
Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) by their respective Boards and Executive
Committees.
|