Neustar (.us), Public Interest Registry (.org) and Verisign (.com/.net) are participating in a four month trial with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Food and Drug Administration to curb illegal online sales of unapproved opioids.
The US government continues to be opposed to changes to Whois that they believe will have little benefit for consumer privacy and major benefits for cyber-criminals. The comments were made, again, in a speech by the the NTIA’s Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information, David J. Redl, at a FDA Online Opioid Summit in Washington, D.C. on 2 April.
In his speech, Redl said âthe WHOIS is a resource that, prior to the GDPR, provided public access to domain name registration information, including contact information for the entity or person registering the domain name. This information is a critical tool that helps keep people accountable for what they do and put online. Law enforcement uses WHOIS to shut down criminal enterprises and malicious websites, including those that illegally sell opioids. Cybersecurity researchers use it to track bad actors. And it is a first line in the defense of intellectual property protection, including the misuse of opioid brand names.â
The European Unionâs General Data Protection Regulation has been developed by the European Commission to give individuals more control over their data that businesses hold, including domain name Registries and Registrars. It also applies to businesses outside of the EU that hold data on citizens and residents of the EU. Itâs impact is far-reaching and penalties for breaches are severe â fines of up to â¬20 million or up to 4% of the annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater.
âUnfortunately, when GDPR went into effect, those companies responsible for providing WHOIS stopped publishing much of the data because they feared it would make them vulnerable to the massive fines GDPR imposes for privacy violations. The U.S. governmentâs position on this is clear: the loss of a public WHOIS without a predictable and timely mechanism to access redacted information has little benefit for consumer privacy, and major benefits for cyber-criminals.â
But Redl says there has been some progress on this issue within ICANN. âFirst, ICANN put in place last year a temporary policy that clarified that WHOIS data should continue to be collected and reasonable access should be provided. This kicked off an intensive global multistakeholder discussion about how to develop a long-term solution. NTIA continues to actively push U.S. interests in these discussions. In March, policy recommendations were finalised and submitted to the ICANN Board for approval.â
Redl says he wants âto congratulate the people who have worked on developing these policy recommendations for how to handle the processing of WHOIS information in a manner that is compliant with GDPR. This was the first step we needed to ensure that the WHOIS system is preserved.â
âHowever, it must be noted, issues remain. Yet to be addressed is development of a technical solution, and policies associated with disclosure and access to non-public WHOIS information. Now it is time to deliberately and swiftly create a system that allow for third parties with legitimate interests, like law enforcement, IP rights holders, and cybersecurity researchers to access non-public data critical to fulfilling their missions. NTIA is expecting this second phase of the discussion to kick off in earnest in the coming weeks, and to achieve substantial progress in advance of ICANNâs meeting in Montreal in November.
Redl concluded by saying the âNTIA remains a staunch defender of the free and open Internet. Thatâs not going to change. But we also arenât going to turn a blind eye to the real issues that are raised by this freedom and openness.â
âWe reject the notion that a free and open Internet must tacitly condone illegal activity. We believe thereâs a path to solving these issues without turning our backs on innovation and prosperity. And that path begins with honest discussions and debates, with compromise and collaboration. So if you have concerns or solutions youâd like to offer, I invite you to talk to NTIA. We welcome all thoughtful approaches to building the Internet of the future.â
The Internet Commerce Association is launching a campaign calling for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to stop an expected application for an increase in the .com registry fee when the current ‘price cap’ agreement expires on 30 November 2018. The ICA is calling any increase in the fee âan unjustified price increase that would over time effectively constitute a billion-dollar âtaxâ on Internet users.â
The ICA, a non-profit trade organisation representing domain name investors, website developers and related companies, says that they expect Verisign to seek the price increase from the NTIA, which comes under the U.S. Department of Commerce. Any increase, the ICA claims, would âfurther enrich Verisign, âThe Most Profitable Company You’ve Never Heard Ofâ, which is already enjoying huge windfall profits?â
The ICA claims the cost of running the .com registry may be as low as $3 per domain, but Verisign charges $7.85 to registries. The ICA further claims that due to the dominance of .com, Verisign has no real competitive pressure on their pricing. Before the U.S. government stepped in to cap Verisign’s prices in 2012, Verisign’s previous contract permitted it to raise prices 7% annually in most years.
The ICA notes in their announcement that âthanks to Verisign’s exclusive contract to operate the .com registry, granted without a competitive bidding process, Verisign earned $457 million last year, and enjoys inflated operating margins of over 60%. Its windfall profits powered a tripling of its stock price over the past five years â despite the freeze imposed on .com prices. Verisign places fourth behind only Apple, Facebook, and Alphabet (Google’s parent company) in terms of revenue per employee. Verisign uses its excess cash to reward its top four executives with nearly $18 million in compensation in 2017 â equivalent to 7% of Verisign’s operating expenses (excluding cost of revenue). In comparison, the compensation of Oracle’s and Adobe’s top four executives is about 1% of operating expenses.â
The ICA concludes their announcement saying that ânot content with their current windfall profits, Verisign will likely seek an unjustified price increase that would over time effectively constitute a billion-dollar âtaxâ on Internet users.â
To garner support for their campaign, the ICA has launched a petition on change.org to raise public awareness here.
After intervention from the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Harvard University Cyberlaw Clinic, itâs now possible to register .us domain names with the âseven dirty wordsâ.
The change of course in policy by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), part of the Department of Commerce, and Neustar, the .us registry, came about following the registration of the domain name fucknazis.us by Jeremy Rubin.
According to a post by the Cyberlaw Clinic, Rubin created the website and registered the domain name in 2017 and began offering a âvirtual lapel pinâ that allowed Ethereum (a popular digital currency) users to support opposition to anti-semitic and white supremacist conduct in the United States around the time of the tragic events in Charlottesville, Virginia last year. The registration was initially allowed, but then it was abruptly terminated due to the word âfuckâ in the domain name.
âAfter a lot of back and forth (and significant patience on Jeremyâs part)âthe domain name is now (back) in Jeremyâs hands and the site is now (back) up and running. We are also pleased that this incident prompted re-evaluation of a policy and practice of the United States Department of Commerce with respect to the .us country code top level domain (ccTLD) that clearly violated the First Amendment.â
It appears that the NTIA and Neustar had a policy of using the Pacifica list of 7 dirty words that canât be used when registering .us domain names and it appears there had been discussions under way for some time as to whether it was still appropriate to enforce the list.
The list of 7 dirty words are 7 English-language words that American comedian George Carlin first mentioned in 1972 in his monologue “Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television”, notes Wikipedia. The words are: shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker and tits.
In 1973 Pacifica station WBAI broadcast a version of Carlinâs routine that led to a complaint by a member of Morality in Media. There followed a declaratory order by the Federal Communications Commission and appeals which led to the Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 in 1978 that in the end formally established indecency regulation in American broadcasting. Which led to American broadcast networks âgenerally censor themselves with regard to many of the seven dirty words.â In 2010 “fleeting” use of expletives were ruled unconstitutionally vague by a three-judge panel of the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York … as they violated the First Amendment due to their possible effects regarding free speech.â
Preserving WHOIS has become of the 2 main priorities internationally for the U.S. government’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration with fears the service may go “dark and become a relic of the Internet's history.” Continue reading U.S. Govt’s NTIA Has Preservation of WHOIS As Priority With Concerns It May Go Dark
Verisign has just filed a Form 8-K with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) revealing that the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has approved the extension of the .Com registry Agreement through November 30, 2024.
We previously reported that, on September 15th, ICANNâs Board approved the .Com RA extensionâ and simultaneously approved an extension of the existing $7.85 ceiling on .Com wholesale prices through 2024. Notwithstanding that price cap extension, the wholesale pricing of .Com domains could be revisited by ICANN and Verisign if NTIA does not extend the separate Cooperative Agreement (CA), currently in force through  November 30, 2018; or does extend it but with a different pricing control.
As described in the SEC filing, the NTIA action took the form of two separate amendments to the CA, as follows:
On October 20, 2016, Verisign and the U.S. Department of Commerce (the âDOCâ) entered into Amendment Number Thirty-Three (33) (âAmendment 33â) to the Cooperative Agreement between Verisign and the DOC. Except as modified by Amendment 33, the terms and conditions of the Cooperative Agreement, remain unchanged. Amendment 33 relieves, releases and discharges Verisign from all root zone operation, management and maintenance responsibilities, obligations or requirements under the Cooperative Agreement, including but not limited to, those contained within Amendments 11 and 31. Following this release, the RZMA between Verisign and ICANN became effective.
On October 20, 2016, Verisign and the DOC entered into Amendment Number Thirty-Four (34) (âAmendment 34â) to the Cooperative Agreement between Verisign and the DOC. Except as modified by Amendment 34, the terms and conditions of the Cooperative Agreement, remain unchanged. Under the terms of Amendment 34, the DOC approves the amendment to the Registry Agreement as in the public interest, which extends the term of the Registry Agreement to coincide with the eight-year term of the RZMA. In addition, the DOC retains the right to conduct a public interest review for the sole purpose of determining whether the DOC will extend the term of the Cooperative Agreement before it expires on November 30, 2018. Verisign agrees to cooperate with such a review and to work in good faith to reach mutual agreement with the DOC to resolve issues identified in such review and to work in good faith to implement any agreed upon changes as of the expiration of the current term of the Cooperative Agreement. (Emphasis added)
The Root Zone Maintainer Service Agreement (RZMA) referenced in both amendments was the major component of the CA. With its termination, and transfer of the RZMA counterparty role from NTIA to ICANN, about all that remains of the CA is the wholesale price cap. So in essence when the NTIA decides whether to extend the CA beyond 2018 or let it terminate it will be deciding whether .Com should continue to be subject to a wholesale price cap. If the NTIA conducts a public interest review to determine whether the CA will be extended beyond 2018 it will likely solicit input from the public.
The NTIAâs approval of the .Com RA extension also contains the caveat that âThis approval is not intended to confer federal antitrust immunity on Verisign with respect to the .com Registry Agreement, as amended.â However, it is highly unlikely that Verisign would ever face antitrust scrutiny for its .Com pricing while it is charging a government-imposed wholesale price.
In addition to its SEC filing, Verisign has also just published a separate FAQ document providing its explanation of these developments; it is published in full at the end of this post. Letâs focus on these two questions and answers:
Q: Will the Department of Commerce extend the Cooperative Agreement?
A: The Department of Commerce has reserved the right to conduct a public interest review to determine whether the Cooperative Agreement should be extended.
Q: Will the public interest review result in changes to Verisignâs pricing for .com domain name registrations?
A: The purpose of the public interest review will be solely to determine whether the Cooperative Agreement should be extended. (Emphasis added)
That second answer is factually correct, yet incomplete â because a decision to terminate the CA would end the U.S. government imposed price cap on .Com. As we noted when reporting on the ICANN Boardâs approval of the .Com RA, its adopted Resolution contained this language:
Whereas, the proposed Amendment also requires Verisign and ICANN to cooperate and negotiate in good faith to: (1) amend the .COM Registry Agreement by the second anniversary date of the proposed Amendment in order to preserve and enhance the security of the Internet or the TLD; and (2) as may be necessary for consistency with changes to the Cooperative Agreement between Verisign and the U.S. Department of Commerce. All other terms and conditions in the existing Registry Agreement remain unchanged.
The .Com RA extension became effective on October 1, 2106 when the IANA transition occurred, so ICANN and Verisign are now committed to review the RA and amend it to make it consistent with any future changes to the CA. As we read that Resolution provision, if NTIA decides not to extend the CA, or extends it with a different price control provision, the RA would no longer be consistent with it and good faith negotiations would ensue to make it so.
The direct relationship between the CA and the continuation of the .Com price freeze was outlined in the August 31st letter from the Department of Justice to Sen. Cruz, which stated:
We note that the current extension proposal contemplated by ICANN and Verisign does not change the price cap contained in the 2012 .com Registry Agreement, which will remain in effect through November 30, 2018. Nor does the current extension proposal alter the price cap in Amendment 32 of the Cooperative Agreement. Moreover, if NTIA were to approve an extension of the .com Registry Agreement, it would have the right in its sole discretion to extend the term of the Cooperative Agreement with the current price cap in place until 2024 at any time prior to November 30, 2018, the date on which the Cooperative Agreement is currently scheduled to expire. If this occurs, the $7.85 fee cap would be extended another six years to 2024. (Emphasis added)
As the last sentence makes clear, if NTIA determines not to extend the CA and lets it expire then the $7.85 fee cap would no longer be in effect.
Now itâs true that since DOJ wrote that letter ICANNâs Board approved the RA extension accompanied by an amendment to the RA extending the $7.85 price cap through 2024. But itâs also true that the very same RA obligates ICANN and Verisign to engage in good faith negotiations to bring the RA into consistency with any changes in the CA â and its termination would certainly be a major change.
The bottom line is that NTIAâs approval of the .Com RA extension constitutes the last official act to extend Verisignâs role as registry operator through at least 2024, and probably beyond as it does not alter the RAâs presumptive renewal clause.
But it does not determine .Com pricing beyond 2018, as whether the price cap or some other form of pricing control continues past 2018 depends on the NTIAâs future  decision on whether and in what form to extend the CA. And that NTIA decision will be followed up by ICANN-Verisign negotiations to render the RA consistent with the CA.
Hereâs the full text of Verisignâs FAQ document on todayâs development:
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Has the Cooperative Agreement been amended to remove Verisignâs root zone
maintainer obligations?
A: Yes, those functions will now be performed by Verisign for ICANN under the
Root Zone Maintainer Service Agreement, which ICANN posted for public review at
https://www.icann.org/iana_imp_docs/63-root-zone-maintainer-agreement-v-1-0
Q: Who will authorize changes to the root zone file?
A: ICANN will authenticate and verify submitted changes, which are then submitted to
Verisign for publication, per the RZMA.
Q: Has the term of the .com Registry Agreement been extended?
A: Yes, the Department of Commerce has approved the extension as in the public
interest. The registry agreement term now ends on November 30, 2024.
Q: Was the Cooperative Agreement extended?
A: No. However, the Department of Commerce has the right, in its sole discretion, to
extend the Cooperative Agreement before it is scheduled to expire on November 30,
2018.
Q: Will the Department of Commerce extend the Cooperative Agreement?
A: The Department of Commerce has reserved the right to conduct a public interest
review to determine whether the Cooperative Agreement should be extended.
Q: Will the public interest review result in changes to Verisignâs pricing for .com
domain name registrations?
A: The purpose of the public interest review will be solely to determine whether the
Cooperative Agreement should be extended.
Q: What happens if issues arise during the public interest review?
A: The parties have agreed to work in good faith to reach mutual agreement to resolve
any issues.
This article by Philip Corwin from the Internet Commerce Association was sourced with permission from:
http://www.internetcommerce.org/ntia-approves-com-ra-extension/
The US National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), who was responsible for overseeing the IANA transition to a global multistakeholder oversight is now reopening a consultation on how to boost IPv6 adoption. With IPv4 addresses as âscarce as henâs teethâ the NTIA recognises the imperative for IPv6 implementation and use.
The consultation originally opened on 18 August seeking public comments and input on the benefits, costs and challenges experienced, as well as any insight into additional incentives that could aid future adoption, implementation and support of IPv6. In response to requests for additional time in which to comment, the NTIA has extended the closing deadline for submitting comments to 17 October.
The NTIA is specifically seeking comments from adopters and implementers of IPv6 as well as any other interested stakeholders to share information on the benefits, costs and challenges they have experienced, as well as any insight into additional incentives that could aid future adoption, implementation, and support of IPv6. After analysing the comments, the Department intends to aggregate input received into a report that will be used to inform domestic and global efforts focused on IPv6 promotion, including any potential NTIA initiatives.
On 1 October the US government through the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) relinquished its role of overseeing the technical management of the ‘internet’s address book’, or the IANA functions, that ICANN has overseen since its inception. The role was handed over to a global multi-stakeholder group, allowing the IANA functions contract to expire.But the right of American politics did its best to thwart the transfer of powers using its usual efforts of fear and ignorance. The cheerleader of the opposition was Senator Ted Cruz who invoked fear reminiscent of the cold war opposition to the USSR, saying the transfer of powers jeopardised “free speech online and has been widely denounced by conservative and grassroots leaders and Members of Congress.”There was even a lawsuit from four US Republican state governments – Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma and Nevada – that sought a temporary restraining order to prevent the IANA contract from expiring on 30 September. The states argued the handover was unconstitutional and required congressional approval. But the case failed.From Saturday the global multi-stakeholder group, which consists of a collection of academics, technical experts, private industry and government representatives, public interest advocates and individual users around the world, will oversee the IANA functions. It’s a transfer that has been planned since 1997 and in March 2014 a formal plan was announced. It had been a goal of Democratic and Republican administrations, with the odd exception, through the Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama presidencies.There won’t be many noticeable changes. Speaking to IP Pro: The Internet, ICANN’s Theresa Swinehart said “nothing really changes in the context of ICANN overall, aside from some adjustments in the clerical functions and the role we play in accommodating the community proposal, and in enhancing some of the accountability processes we have in place.””It’s not changes to what we do, it’s taking on additional areas and areas of additional balances on the accountability side.”The change had near unanimous support from the global internet community, including from the Internet Society and the Internet Engineering Taskforce (IETF).”Today’s outcome confirms the strength of both the community and the multi-stakeholder process in tackling issues important to the continued growth and evolution of the Internet,” said Gonzalo Camarillo, Chair of the Internet Society’s Board of Trustees. “We commend the NTIA for its trust and confidence in the multi-stakeholder Internet community to achieve this important accomplishment.”The IETF noted in a blog post that “this is a good day — but also in many ways just like previous days. It is what we are already doing. The Internet will continue to work as it has before. The communities continue to work with the IANA system to make sure it responds to the needs of the users, as we have. Networks and people co-operate, voluntarily, so that they can connect over the Internet. Just like what the world has been doing since the dawn of the Internet.””Like many things on the internet, this is the result of many incremental steps by many people, Andrew Sullivan, IAB Chair, told the IETF blog. “It is incremental change that brings us the stability of the internet.””We rarely get the opportunity to witness a global consensus as broad and diverse as the one in favour of this transition,” Alissa Cooper, Chair of the IANA stewardship transition Coordination Group, who also spoke to the IETF blog. “Hundreds of people and organizations from across sectors and across the world had the courage and endurance to see this process through, and as a result the Internet is running as smoothly today as it did yesterday.”
Has your organisation implemented IPv6? If so, the US National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) wants to hear from you. The NTIA wants to hear from all stakeholders, particularly those who have implemented IPv6, about the factors and circumstances that influence the decision to adopt and use the protocol and what NTIA can do to promote greater adoption of IPv6.
The consultation has come about as the NTIA notes âwe are on the verge of an explosion in the number of Internet-connected devices, from smartwatches to connected refrigerators, furniture and thermostats. Some experts predict that there will be as many as 200 billion connected devices around the world by 2020, or about 25 devices per person.â
Some of the questions the NTIA is asking are: What are the benefits of and obstacles related to implementing IPv6? What factors contribute to an organizationâs decision to implement IPv6? What is the anticipated return on an IPv6-related investment? How long does the planning process for IPv6 implementation take, and what are the different types of costs involved?
A posting on the NTIA website by Ashley Heineman, Telecommunications Policy Specialist, Office of International Affairs goes on to say:
Many of those devices will need an IP address to connect to the Internet, but the legacy Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) supports only about 4.3 billion IP addresses. Current demand has all-but-exhausted the global supply of IPv4 addresses. Luckily, the Internet technical community has been developing the next-generation Internet Protocol for nearly two decades. Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) offers 2128 IP addresses â thatâs more than 340 undecillion addresses, or 340 followed by 36 digits.
The pace of IPv6 adoption has picked up recently, but only about a third of the Internet services in the United States are IPv6 capable. As IPv4 addresses become more scarce, companies and other organizations that have yet to transition to IPv6 may find it difficult to expand their Internet presence.
Many of those devices will need an IP address to connect to the Internet, but the legacy Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) supports only about 4.3 billion IP addresses. Current demand has all-but-exhausted the global supply of IPv4 addresses. Luckily, the Internet technical community has been developing the next-generation Internet Protocol for nearly two decades. Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) offers 2128 IP addresses â thatâs more than 340 undecillion addresses, or 340 followed by 36 digits.
The pace of IPv6 adoption has picked up recently, but only about a third of the Internet services in the United States are IPv6 capable. As IPv4 addresses become more scarce, companies and other organizations that have yet to transition to IPv6 may find it difficult to expand their Internet presence.
For more information and the source of the above, see:
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2016/ntia-seeks-input-it-develops-initiatives-increase-ipv6-adoption
Brief OverviewThis public comment proceeding seeks community input on the proposed IANA Naming Function Agreement. In order to reflect the recommendations contained in the proposal by the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) as provided to the ICANN Board and transmitted to NTIA on 10 March 2016, ICANN must incorporate an affiliate referred to as PTI, and put in place an agreement between ICANN and PTI granting PTI the right to perform the IANA naming function.
In the ICG proposal, the naming community recommended that a new legal entity referred to as PTI be formed, and an agreement is put in place between ICANN and PTI to grant PTI the right to perform the IANA naming function. The domain name community provided a draft term sheet in the ICG proposal and well as a listing of all provisions recommended to be carried over from the IANA Functions Contract. This term sheet and carry-over identification were used by ICANN as a base to draft the proposed Naming Function Agreement.
As per the requirements of the domain name community, the Agreement will contain Service Level Expectations (SLEs) for the performance of the IANA naming function. The SLEs design team within the CWG-Stewardship and ICANN have agreed on thresholds for the SLEs and they are being presented to the CWG-Stewardship for sign-off. Those interested are encouraged to participate in CWG-Stewardship discussions and provide input. Once the CWG-Stewardship signs off on the SLEs, they will be incorporated into Annex A of the Agreement.
The ICG proposal was developed through public processes, including multiple opportunities for public comment. All implementation planning efforts can be tracked at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation. The proposed Naming Function Agreement incorporates the necessary recommendations from the naming community in the ICG proposal as well as the relevant provisions from the ICANN Bylaws. Because this proposed Naming Function Agreement is drafted to the publicly vetted proposal, this comment period is designed to solicit inputs from the broader community on how the proposal and ICANN Bylaws requirements were brought into the proposed Naming Function Agreement and if there are areas seen as inconsistent with the ICG proposal or ICANN Bylaws. Of note, the CWG-Stewardship and the independent counsel retained to advise the CWG-Stewardship have reviewed a draft of the Naming Function Agreement and provided feedback, which has been incorporated into this proposed Naming Function Agreement that is being published for public comment. This public comment period is not intended to be a forum for the reconsideration of the ICG proposal.
For almost two decades, ICANN has performed the IANA functions under a zero-dollar contract with the U.S. Government, implementing policies developed by the multistakeholder community. The U.S. Government always envisioned its role as steward of the IANA functions as temporary, and, in March 2014, announced its intention to transition that stewardship to the global multistakeholder community. This transition will not affect how the identifiers are coordinated nor will it affect the functionality of the Internet or our ability to access it. In fact, the transition is nothing more than the final step in an 18-year process to privatize the management of the IANA functions.
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) asked ICANN to convene an inclusive, global discussion that involved the full range of stakeholders to collectively develop a proposal for the transition. NTIA stated that the transition proposal must have broad community support and meet the following criteria:
NTIA also specified that it would not accept a proposal that replaces NTIA‘s role with a government-led or intergovernmental organization solution.
Two sets of recommendations comprise the package provided to the ICANN Board for the IANA Stewardship Transition. One set of recommendations involved the proposal from the direct operational customers of the IANA functions. This proposal was prepared by the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG). The ICG, comprised of thirty individuals, representing the broad range of Internet stakeholder interests, were nominated by their respective communities. The ICG assembled input from three global multistakeholder communities with direct operational relationships with the IANA functions to develop a proposal to transition NTIA‘s stewardship of the IANA functions.
The other set of recommendations related to enhancing ICANN Accountability in relation to the IANA Stewardship Transition. This proposal was prepared by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability), made up of members from ICANN‘s Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees, and over 200 participants, developed a separate proposal for enhancing ICANN‘s accountability in light of the changing historical relationship with the U.S. Government. Together with ICANN‘s existing structures, the group recommended mechanisms to ensure ICANN remains accountable to the global Internet community.
On March 10, 2016, the ICANN Board of Directors transmitted the IANA Stewardship Transition and Accountability Proposals to NTIA for its review and approval.
On 9 June, NTIA announced âthat the proposal developed by the global Internet multistakeholder community meets the criteria NTIA outlined in March 2014 when it stated its intent to transition the U.S. Governmentâs stewardship role for the Internet domain name system (DNS) technical functions, known as the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions.â
ICANNâs implementation planning efforts based on requirements of the ICG and CCWG-Accountability proposals can be tracked at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation.
Open Date: 10 Aug 2016 23:59 UTC
Close Date: 9 Sep 2016 23:59 UTC
Staff Report Due: 16 Sep 2016 23:59 UTC
This ICANN announcement was sourced from:
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/iana-naming-function-agreement-2016-08-10-en
