ICANN Approval of IANA Transition Plans Viewed Near Certain Ahead of Meeting
ICANN’s final consideration of plans for the upcoming Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) transition will be the focus of ICANN’s meeting this week in Marrakech, Morocco. Several stakeholders told us the meeting also likely will be a harbinger of ICANN’s future after CEO Fadi Chehadé’s imminent retirement. The board plans to meet Thursday on the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group’s IANA transition plan and a related proposal from the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) that recommends changes to ICANN’s accountability mechanisms. ICANN’s chartering organizations already signed off on the IANA transition plan but several of them still need to consider the CCWG-Accountability proposal (see 1602250053). ICANN is to formally begin the meeting Saturday.
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.
It's near certain that ICANN will approve the IANA transition plan and CCWG-Accountability proposal given the compromises CCWG-Accountability made in a final version of its proposal submitted to the ICANN chartering organizations in late February, CCWG-Accountability participants and observers said. “I think it’s all over but the shouting” within ICANN on the CCWG-Accountability proposal, said Red Branch Consulting founder Paul Rosenzweig. “I would be very surprised if the [CCWG-Accountability] proposal doesn’t get sufficient support either within the chartering organizations or from the board,” said Phil Corwin, principal of e-commerce and IP law consultancy Virtualaw. “There are lots of people who are still unhappy with this part or that part, but it’s been a very long process. The thought of revisiting it and spending more time on it is just something that no one wants to engage in.”
Most ICANN chartering organizations are likely to ratify the CCWG-Accountability proposal “but the only one that remains unclear" is the Governmental Advisory Committee, said Milton Mueller, Georgia Tech communication and information public policy professor. “It’s not clear whether that’s the influence of a few holdout governments or if it just takes a long time for them to make up their minds.” GAC was unable to reach consensus on key aspects of an earlier draft of the CCWG-Accountability proposal (see 1601260067), and its final opinion on the proposal remains important because of recommendations that would alter GAC’s role in a post-IANA transition ICANN, an industry lobbyist said. GAC is to meet at least five times during the Marrakech meeting on the CCWG-Accountability proposal and is expected to make a final decision on the proposal by Tuesday. The At-Large Advisory Committee, Country Code Names Supporting Organization and Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) are also to vote Tuesday and Wednesday on whether to support the CCWG-Accountability proposal.
“The fight [over the IANA transition] now moves to NTIA and Congress, if there’s a fight to be had there,” Rosenzweig said: “I’ll be interested to see” if the scrutiny that GOP presidential contender Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is giving to Chehadé’s involvement with the Chinese government-led World Internet Conference (see 1602220066 and 1602240035) “has any traction” among ICANN stakeholders during the Marrakech meeting. The House Communications Subcommittee also plans a March 17 hearing on the IANA transition (see 1602260032). An industry lobbyist told us it’s now unclear whether the focus will be on the perspectives of ICANN and NTIA or on the views of other stakeholders.
Chehadé “did himself and ICANN no favors by responding to Cruz in a nonresponsive way and I’m not surprised that it’s brought this reaction,” Corwin said. “It’s very unfortunate.” Cruz and two other GOP senators doubled down on their scrutiny of ICANN Thursday. They sent a letter to ICANN Chairman Steve Crocker seeking more information about the board’s reaction to Chehadé’s plan to become co-chairman of a high-level WIC advisory committee, along with information about other aspects of ICANN’s relationship with China. Crocker has until Friday to respond to the senators’ letter (see 1603030067).
ICANN’s Marrakech meeting is expected to be as much an informal debut for incoming CEO Göran Marby as it will be Chehadé’s last goodbye. ICANN selected Marby, currently Swedish Post and Telecom Authority director-general, in early February to permanently replace Chehadé, but Marby won’t become CEO until May. ICANN Global Domains Division President Akram Atallah will be acting CEO before Marby takes the reins (see 1602080066). “This is the changing of the guard [from Chehadé to Marby], so it’ll be interesting to see how he starts to define himself,” Rosenzweig said. “That’s a long process, but [the Marrakech meeting] is like a first date and first impressions matter.” Marby plans to meet in Marrakech with members of the ICANN chartering organizations and stakeholder groups, an industry lobbyist said. For instance, Chehadé and Marby were to meet with the GNSO Council over the weekend, giving GNSO members “our first chance to get an impression [of Marby] and deliver some views to him,” Corwin said: “That’s going to be very important to start taking the measure of” Marby.
Stakeholders will also turn their attention during the Marrakech meeting to other domain name policy issues, including continued development of the generic top level domains (gTLD) program. Mueller said he will continue paying attention to a second round of CCWG-Accountability work in ICANN accountability changes meant to follow the working group’s first accountability proposal. He said he will also be following GNSO’s policy development process (PDP) for determining whether the current WHOIS domain registration data framework sufficiently meets the needs of new gTLDs. The GNSO Council is also set to consider beginning a “very important” PDP that would review both the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy and all rights protection mechanisms related to the gTLD program, Corwin said.