ICANN Board Says ccNSO Policies Key to IANA Transition
LOS ANGELES -- The ICANN Board addressed concerns over the deadline of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) transition and how it will respond to the Cross Community Working Group’s (CCWG) final accountability proposal, at ICANN 51 panels Tuesday. Board members underscored the importance Country Code Supporting Names Organization (ccNSO) to the policy development process of the IANA transition. The board will release a statement Thursday clarifying how it will deal with the CCWG accountability proposal, said Board Vice-Chair Bruce Tonkin in an interview. (See separate report in today’s issue.) Tonkin said it’s highly unlikely the board would reject that proposal.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Saying the IANA transition’s Sept. 30, 2015, deadline is “formidable is a significant understatement,” particularly for developing ccNSO policies, said Byron Holland, ccNSO chairman. ICANN Board Chairman Steve Crocker agreed with that assessment and said there’s substantial work to be done after the transition proposal is accepted, and the “core” issues facing the IANA transition are determining re-delegation and contention issues for county code top-level domains (ccTLDs). Crocker again said the Commerce Department can extend the deadline another four years. The deadline isn’t “hard and fast,” he said.
It’s “essential” for the ccTLD community to determine the “structure” of the IANA transition for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group, including an “appeals mechanism” for ccTLDs, said Chris Disspain, ICANN board member. Such a mechanism isn’t currently “on the table” and needs to be dealt with soon, he said. There isn’t enough time to develop ccTLD policies before the transition, including the “retirement” of ccTLDs, said Keith Davidson, Asia Pacific Top Level Domain Name Association chairman. Davidson said that in light of the transition’s timeline, agreeing to “first principles” for ccTLD policies could be a better strategy than trying to re-evaluate all related policies.
ICANN’s Commercial Stakeholder Group was “very pleased” with the revised accountability proposal, but there are some “outstanding questions,” said Kristina Rosette, ICANN Intellectual Property Constituency president. One of the questions is how the board will handle the final accountability from the new CCWG, she said.
ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade cited Monday remarks by NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling that if the board and the community can’t agree on an accountability process, it won’t be accepted. Strickling gave the ICANN community a “very clear signal” the agreement between the board and the community on the accountability proposal is a “key ingredient,” said Chehade. That’s a “very important safeguard,” he said.
The board has discussed that it could use a similar methods for addressing the CCWG’s accountability proposal as it does for policies recommended by ICANN’s supporting organizations, said Tonkin on a panel. In those cases, a proposal that the board believes isn’t in the “public interest” can be sent back to the working group, he said. The ccNSO bylaws say the board can’t “unilaterally” change a proposal and “make up its own accountability mechanism,” said Tonkin. “This is just a last resort,” he said. “Let’s not have any surprises,” said NetChoice Executive Director Steve DelBianco.