Skip to main content

Comments on Evolving the Governance of the Root Server System
statement-iab-comments-on-evolving-the-governance-of-the-root-server-system-00

Document Type IAB Statement
Title Comments on Evolving the Governance of the Root Server System
Published 2019-06-26
Metadata last updated 2023-08-09
State Active
Send notices to (None)
statement-iab-comments-on-evolving-the-governance-of-the-root-server-system-00

On 2019-06-26, the IAB provided the following response to the ICANN Public Comment on Evolving the Governance of the Root Server System:

The IAB thanks ICANN and the Root Server Operators for the opportunity 
to comment on this draft governance model.  The IAB believes that it 
would be able to perform those duties discussed in the model, which we 
understand to be:

  - Appointing two representatives to the Governance Working Group
  - Reviewing  the work of the Governance Working Group.
  - Coordinating with the Root Server System Governance Board
  - Appointing a member of Root Server System Standing Committee.

We do note two areas where the drafters may wish to consider providing 
more detail.  The first is the work of the secretariat in facilitating 
liaisons.  The text currently says, in part:

  - Coordinating and providing transparency to the operationalization of 
    appropriate standards (e.g., RSSAC publications and IETF RFCs).
  - Assuming new coordination roles that could be defined in the future

The IAB believes that a description of which coordination roles would be 
under the Secretariat would be useful, as the RGB and IAB will evidently 
also coordinate with each other directly.  Similarly, clarification of 
whether the coordination envisioned for the deployment of standards will 
include contributions to the relevant IETF working groups would be 
useful.

As a second point, the text on the work of the Root Server Operator 
Review Panel contains no direct references to the appeal path of any 
decisions it takes.  The IAB understands the text to imply that the ICANN 
Board's approval is the first confirmation of RRP decisions and that 
further appeals take the form of reconsideration requests as set out in 
Article 4 of the ICANN Bylaws.  If that is the case, explicit statements 
in this document may make the document more comprehensible to a broad 
audience.  If it is not the case, the IAB would welcome other 
clarifications of this point.

regards,

Ted Hardie
for the IAB