Presentation on the waste service standards project - objectives, possible deliverables, project roadmap and criteria for prioritisation. It also covered going forward and what the focus would be including measuring impact, supporting business cases, agreeing the afterlife of the standard, managing 'missed' collections and other challenges and opportunities.
Presented by Linda O' Halloran, Head of Products, Local Digital Programme, DCLG, and Sarah Prag, Independent Service Design Lead, DCLG Local Waste Service Standards Project, at the final discovery event for the minimum viablke collaboration (MVC) group for the Local Waste Service Standards project that took place in London on 17 July 2015.
PTI is an affiliate of ICANN responsible for performing the IANA functions and delivering IANA services. ICANN employees are seconded to PTI to deliver these services. PTI implements policies developed by the ICANN community. The document discusses who to contact at PTI or IANA for questions, provides an update on IPv4 recovered pool allocations including the most recent allocation to APNIC, notes that performance and third party audits ensure services are meeting requirements, and includes an example outline for monthly reporting.
The document describes alpha-beta pruning in minimax search. It keeps track of alpha, the highest value seen by maximizing nodes, and beta, the lowest value seen by minimizing nodes. Pruning occurs when a node value is lower than alpha (for maximizing nodes) or higher than beta (for minimizing nodes). The document walks through 14 steps of applying alpha-beta pruning to a sample search tree.
Alpha-beta pruning is a technique used in game tree search to prune branches that cannot possibly change the outcome. It uses two values - alpha, the highest value for the maximizing player, and beta, the lowest value for the minimizing player. The algorithm traverses the game tree recursively, pruning branches where the value at a node exceeds beta (for maximizing) or falls below alpha (for minimizing). This allows portions of the tree to be skipped over, improving search efficiency. The example shows how alpha and beta values are updated during traversal and used to prune subtrees without affecting the optimal solution.
The document appears to contain numerical values and notes related to checking conditions and comparing values of alpha and beta. It states that alpha must be greater than beta, checks this condition for various alpha and beta values, and stops checking further when the condition is true.
The document provides an example of alpha-beta pruning, an algorithm that prunes branches from a game tree during a depth-first search. It demonstrates how the algorithm works by showing the values of alpha and beta passed between nodes and updated at max and min nodes. Branches are pruned when alpha is greater than or equal to beta, indicating the current path will not provide a better solution than one already found. The example shows how alpha-beta pruning reduces the number of nodes that must be evaluated to determine the optimal move in a game.
The document discusses the Minimax algorithm and its application to game trees. It explains that Minimax is an optimal decision-making procedure for two-player zero-sum games where one player tries to maximize their score and the other tries to minimize it. It provides examples of how Minimax can be applied to games like Tic-Tac-Toe, Chess, Poker, and Monopoly to find the best move assuming the opponent plays optimally.
The document discusses different search methods for problem solving, including uninformed search, heuristic search, and informed search using heuristic functions. It provides examples of heuristic functions that estimate the cost to reach the goal state and explores greedy best-first search and A* search algorithms. A* combines the cost to reach a node and a heuristic estimate of remaining cost to ensure optimal, efficient search.
Presentation on the waste service standards project - objectives, possible deliverables, project roadmap and criteria for prioritisation. It also covered going forward and what the focus would be including measuring impact, supporting business cases, agreeing the afterlife of the standard, managing 'missed' collections and other challenges and opportunities.
Presented by Linda O' Halloran, Head of Products, Local Digital Programme, DCLG, and Sarah Prag, Independent Service Design Lead, DCLG Local Waste Service Standards Project, at the final discovery event for the minimum viablke collaboration (MVC) group for the Local Waste Service Standards project that took place in London on 17 July 2015.
PTI is an affiliate of ICANN responsible for performing the IANA functions and delivering IANA services. ICANN employees are seconded to PTI to deliver these services. PTI implements policies developed by the ICANN community. The document discusses who to contact at PTI or IANA for questions, provides an update on IPv4 recovered pool allocations including the most recent allocation to APNIC, notes that performance and third party audits ensure services are meeting requirements, and includes an example outline for monthly reporting.
The document describes alpha-beta pruning in minimax search. It keeps track of alpha, the highest value seen by maximizing nodes, and beta, the lowest value seen by minimizing nodes. Pruning occurs when a node value is lower than alpha (for maximizing nodes) or higher than beta (for minimizing nodes). The document walks through 14 steps of applying alpha-beta pruning to a sample search tree.
Alpha-beta pruning is a technique used in game tree search to prune branches that cannot possibly change the outcome. It uses two values - alpha, the highest value for the maximizing player, and beta, the lowest value for the minimizing player. The algorithm traverses the game tree recursively, pruning branches where the value at a node exceeds beta (for maximizing) or falls below alpha (for minimizing). This allows portions of the tree to be skipped over, improving search efficiency. The example shows how alpha and beta values are updated during traversal and used to prune subtrees without affecting the optimal solution.
The document appears to contain numerical values and notes related to checking conditions and comparing values of alpha and beta. It states that alpha must be greater than beta, checks this condition for various alpha and beta values, and stops checking further when the condition is true.
The document provides an example of alpha-beta pruning, an algorithm that prunes branches from a game tree during a depth-first search. It demonstrates how the algorithm works by showing the values of alpha and beta passed between nodes and updated at max and min nodes. Branches are pruned when alpha is greater than or equal to beta, indicating the current path will not provide a better solution than one already found. The example shows how alpha-beta pruning reduces the number of nodes that must be evaluated to determine the optimal move in a game.
The document discusses the Minimax algorithm and its application to game trees. It explains that Minimax is an optimal decision-making procedure for two-player zero-sum games where one player tries to maximize their score and the other tries to minimize it. It provides examples of how Minimax can be applied to games like Tic-Tac-Toe, Chess, Poker, and Monopoly to find the best move assuming the opponent plays optimally.
The document discusses different search methods for problem solving, including uninformed search, heuristic search, and informed search using heuristic functions. It provides examples of heuristic functions that estimate the cost to reach the goal state and explores greedy best-first search and A* search algorithms. A* combines the cost to reach a node and a heuristic estimate of remaining cost to ensure optimal, efficient search.
The document discusses the IANA stewardship transition and the CRISP Team proposal from the Internet numbers community. It provides an update on the proposal development process, which included input from the global Internet community. It also outlines next steps, such as analyzing the proposed IANA service level agreement and coordinating with the other operational communities. The document addresses questions and feedback from the ICANN, IETF and CCWG groups regarding consistency between the proposals.
IANA Stewardship Transition - Moving forward by Paul Wilson [APRICOT 2015]APNIC
This document discusses the next steps in the IANA stewardship transition process, including developing a service level agreement between ICANN and the regional internet registries (RIRs) for the IANA numbering services. It outlines some key elements that will be included in the proposed service level agreement, such as services provided, consequences for failing to meet service levels, terms of the agreement, and dispute resolution. The document also describes the process for developing the service level agreement, which will involve discussions at RIR meetings and aim to produce an agreed upon final agreement. It raises some community discussion points regarding the agreement, such as the separability of numbering services from ICANN and the conditions for changing the provider of these services.
ARIN 35: CRISP Panel by Michael Abejuela, John Sweeting, and Bill Woodcock. Video archives available at: https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_35/ppm.html
The IANA Stewardship Transition Overview & Background APNIC
The document discusses the IANA stewardship transition process. It provides background on the historical role of the US government in overseeing the IANA functions and ICANN. Currently, the NTIA contracts with ICANN to perform the IANA functions through the IANA functions contract, and also has an Affirmation of Commitments with ICANN. The RIRs have proposed different models for enhancing accountability of the IANA functions operator after the transition. Discussions are ongoing on proposals to develop a multistakeholder oversight mechanism.
ARIN 34 IANA Stewardship Transition Planning Process Session by John Curran. Presentation at: https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_34/ppm.html
The document summarizes the work of the Cross Community Working Group on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship) to develop a proposal for transitioning the U.S. government's oversight of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions. It provides an overview of CWG-Stewardship's timeline and progress, linkage to the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability, internal accountability model, and status of its design teams' work. The goal is to produce a consolidated transition proposal that meets the needs of stakeholders and satisfies criteria set by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
The document discusses the background and current situation regarding the IANA stewardship transition process. It provides an overview of the key stakeholders and relationships. It then presents a draft proposal from the RIRs perspective for transitioning the IANA functions away from NTIA stewardship, focusing on maintaining technical stability, ICANN continuing as operator under new accountability mechanisms, and entering new agreements between ICANN and the RIRs.
IANA Stewardship Transition Report by Izumi Okutani [APRICOT 2015]APNIC
The IANA Stewardship Transition Process is currently underway following an announcement from NTIA in 2014. The numbers and protocols communities have submitted transition proposals, while the names community discussions are still ongoing. Regional Internet registries like APNIC have been consolidating input into a global proposal for the numbers role. Next steps include the RIRs developing a service level agreement text for the numbers function based on the community proposal, in consultation with ICANN and taking community input. Future discussions will aim to confirm flexibilities around the proposal while maintaining stability, accountability and transparency throughout the transition process.
APNIC Update and RIR Policies for ccTLDs, presented at APTLD 85APNIC
APNIC Senior Advisor, Membership and Policy, Sunny Chendi presented on APNIC updates and RIR Policies for ccTLDs at APTLD 85 in Goa, India from 19-22 February 2024.
IANA Transition: What does it all mean? @ SAMNOG 27APNIC
The document discusses the IANA transition process, which aims to complete the US government's stewardship role over the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions and transition them to multistakeholder community control. It provides background on IANA and its role in managing DNS root zones, protocol parameters, and internet number registries. The transition plan involves separate community processes to develop proposals for the names, numbers, and protocols operations. The numbers community developed the CRISP proposal for RIR oversight of IANA numbers functions. Additional work focused on improving ICANN accountability. The transition faces a tight timeline to meet US government requirements for submission and approval.
ICANN is a nonprofit organization that coordinates the DNS and IP address systems. It manages the distribution of unique identifiers for the internet, including domain names, IP addresses, and protocol parameters. The presentation provided an overview of ICANN's role, governance as a multistakeholder organization, the IANA transition process, ICANN's strategy in Africa, and the DNS ecosystem including IANA's management of the root zone and domain name services.
Karen Rose, ISOC The IANA FUnctions and Stewardship TransitionGlenn McKnight
Session 2: ICANN Accountability and the Transition of IANA Stewardship
This session will examine the work that is currently being done to make ICANN more accountable to its stakeholders and to transition the IANA function stewardship away from the US National Telecommunications and Information Administration (“NTIA”) and why these issues matter to everyone. The session will start with a description of the structure and functions performed by ICANN, including the IANA function. The role of ICANN in the Internet multi-stakeholder governance model will be discussed, and the involvement of governments in Internet governance will be addressed. This background will then be used as the launching point for a discussion of how the evolution of ICANN and the transition of the IANA function can affect the openness, security, stability and resiliency of the Internet.
18 September 2017 - At ION Malta, Adam Peake discusses the IANA transition:
The IANA transition was successfully completed in October 2016 creating strengthened relationships between the IETF (Internet protocols and standards), Regional Internet Registries RIRs (IP addresses), and ccTLD and gTLD operators and TLD community and ICANN. A new organisation, Public Technical Identifiers (PTI), an affiliate of ICANN, is now responsible for performing the IANA functions and delivering the IANA Services on behalf of ICANN. The session will discuss these new arrangements and how they have enhanced ICANN’s accountability and transparency to the global Internet community. The session will also describe how ICANN is preparing for the Root KSK Rollover.
Day 3 Bob Ochieng - ICANN - Internet 2015Adrian Hall
The document discusses ICANN's role in managing internet domain names and numbers, and the US government's announcement to transition oversight of these functions to the global multistakeholder community. It describes ICANN and the IANA functions it manages, and outlines the two parallel processes underway - transitioning IANA stewardship and enhancing ICANN accountability. The community is developing proposals through working groups to address the requirements set by the US government for transition, including supporting the multistakeholder model and maintaining security, stability, and openness.
IPv4 addresses delegated in Indonesia have steadily increased from 2005 to 2015. As of 2015, Indonesia has received over 5 million IPv4 addresses. IPv4 address transfers allow addresses to be moved between organizations, with over 30 transfers processed for Indonesian organizations. Key requirements for transfers include the addresses being administered by APNIC and the recipient justifying their needs. Transfers can occur between APNIC members, other RIR members, and between APNIC and other NIRs.
Day 2 Bob Ochieng - ICANN - IANA TransitionAdrian Hall
This document provides an overview of the IANA stewardship transition process and enhancing ICANN accountability process. It describes ICANN's role in managing domain names and IP addresses. It outlines the requirements for transition set by NTIA, including supporting the multistakeholder model. Two parallel processes were established - one to transition IANA functions and one to enhance ICANN accountability. Three operational communities (protocol parameters, numbers, and names) developed proposals. The names community proposal process involves design teams and public comments. The ICG will assess all proposals and develop a single transition proposal.
1) APNIC provides internet number resources and services to members in the Asia Pacific region.
2) IPv4 address transfers are now available between APNIC and ARIN regions, with an inter-RIR transfer procedure agreed upon.
3) APNIC conducted training and outreach activities in 2012 on topics like IPv6 deployment and conducted a member survey to help guide future priorities like resource registration and root server deployment in the region.
The document discusses the IANA stewardship transition and the CRISP Team proposal from the Internet numbers community. It provides an update on the proposal development process, which included input from the global Internet community. It also outlines next steps, such as analyzing the proposed IANA service level agreement and coordinating with the other operational communities. The document addresses questions and feedback from the ICANN, IETF and CCWG groups regarding consistency between the proposals.
IANA Stewardship Transition - Moving forward by Paul Wilson [APRICOT 2015]APNIC
This document discusses the next steps in the IANA stewardship transition process, including developing a service level agreement between ICANN and the regional internet registries (RIRs) for the IANA numbering services. It outlines some key elements that will be included in the proposed service level agreement, such as services provided, consequences for failing to meet service levels, terms of the agreement, and dispute resolution. The document also describes the process for developing the service level agreement, which will involve discussions at RIR meetings and aim to produce an agreed upon final agreement. It raises some community discussion points regarding the agreement, such as the separability of numbering services from ICANN and the conditions for changing the provider of these services.
ARIN 35: CRISP Panel by Michael Abejuela, John Sweeting, and Bill Woodcock. Video archives available at: https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_35/ppm.html
The IANA Stewardship Transition Overview & Background APNIC
The document discusses the IANA stewardship transition process. It provides background on the historical role of the US government in overseeing the IANA functions and ICANN. Currently, the NTIA contracts with ICANN to perform the IANA functions through the IANA functions contract, and also has an Affirmation of Commitments with ICANN. The RIRs have proposed different models for enhancing accountability of the IANA functions operator after the transition. Discussions are ongoing on proposals to develop a multistakeholder oversight mechanism.
ARIN 34 IANA Stewardship Transition Planning Process Session by John Curran. Presentation at: https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_34/ppm.html
The document summarizes the work of the Cross Community Working Group on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship) to develop a proposal for transitioning the U.S. government's oversight of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions. It provides an overview of CWG-Stewardship's timeline and progress, linkage to the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability, internal accountability model, and status of its design teams' work. The goal is to produce a consolidated transition proposal that meets the needs of stakeholders and satisfies criteria set by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
The document discusses the background and current situation regarding the IANA stewardship transition process. It provides an overview of the key stakeholders and relationships. It then presents a draft proposal from the RIRs perspective for transitioning the IANA functions away from NTIA stewardship, focusing on maintaining technical stability, ICANN continuing as operator under new accountability mechanisms, and entering new agreements between ICANN and the RIRs.
IANA Stewardship Transition Report by Izumi Okutani [APRICOT 2015]APNIC
The IANA Stewardship Transition Process is currently underway following an announcement from NTIA in 2014. The numbers and protocols communities have submitted transition proposals, while the names community discussions are still ongoing. Regional Internet registries like APNIC have been consolidating input into a global proposal for the numbers role. Next steps include the RIRs developing a service level agreement text for the numbers function based on the community proposal, in consultation with ICANN and taking community input. Future discussions will aim to confirm flexibilities around the proposal while maintaining stability, accountability and transparency throughout the transition process.
APNIC Update and RIR Policies for ccTLDs, presented at APTLD 85APNIC
APNIC Senior Advisor, Membership and Policy, Sunny Chendi presented on APNIC updates and RIR Policies for ccTLDs at APTLD 85 in Goa, India from 19-22 February 2024.
IANA Transition: What does it all mean? @ SAMNOG 27APNIC
The document discusses the IANA transition process, which aims to complete the US government's stewardship role over the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions and transition them to multistakeholder community control. It provides background on IANA and its role in managing DNS root zones, protocol parameters, and internet number registries. The transition plan involves separate community processes to develop proposals for the names, numbers, and protocols operations. The numbers community developed the CRISP proposal for RIR oversight of IANA numbers functions. Additional work focused on improving ICANN accountability. The transition faces a tight timeline to meet US government requirements for submission and approval.
ICANN is a nonprofit organization that coordinates the DNS and IP address systems. It manages the distribution of unique identifiers for the internet, including domain names, IP addresses, and protocol parameters. The presentation provided an overview of ICANN's role, governance as a multistakeholder organization, the IANA transition process, ICANN's strategy in Africa, and the DNS ecosystem including IANA's management of the root zone and domain name services.
Karen Rose, ISOC The IANA FUnctions and Stewardship TransitionGlenn McKnight
Session 2: ICANN Accountability and the Transition of IANA Stewardship
This session will examine the work that is currently being done to make ICANN more accountable to its stakeholders and to transition the IANA function stewardship away from the US National Telecommunications and Information Administration (“NTIA”) and why these issues matter to everyone. The session will start with a description of the structure and functions performed by ICANN, including the IANA function. The role of ICANN in the Internet multi-stakeholder governance model will be discussed, and the involvement of governments in Internet governance will be addressed. This background will then be used as the launching point for a discussion of how the evolution of ICANN and the transition of the IANA function can affect the openness, security, stability and resiliency of the Internet.
18 September 2017 - At ION Malta, Adam Peake discusses the IANA transition:
The IANA transition was successfully completed in October 2016 creating strengthened relationships between the IETF (Internet protocols and standards), Regional Internet Registries RIRs (IP addresses), and ccTLD and gTLD operators and TLD community and ICANN. A new organisation, Public Technical Identifiers (PTI), an affiliate of ICANN, is now responsible for performing the IANA functions and delivering the IANA Services on behalf of ICANN. The session will discuss these new arrangements and how they have enhanced ICANN’s accountability and transparency to the global Internet community. The session will also describe how ICANN is preparing for the Root KSK Rollover.
Day 3 Bob Ochieng - ICANN - Internet 2015Adrian Hall
The document discusses ICANN's role in managing internet domain names and numbers, and the US government's announcement to transition oversight of these functions to the global multistakeholder community. It describes ICANN and the IANA functions it manages, and outlines the two parallel processes underway - transitioning IANA stewardship and enhancing ICANN accountability. The community is developing proposals through working groups to address the requirements set by the US government for transition, including supporting the multistakeholder model and maintaining security, stability, and openness.
IPv4 addresses delegated in Indonesia have steadily increased from 2005 to 2015. As of 2015, Indonesia has received over 5 million IPv4 addresses. IPv4 address transfers allow addresses to be moved between organizations, with over 30 transfers processed for Indonesian organizations. Key requirements for transfers include the addresses being administered by APNIC and the recipient justifying their needs. Transfers can occur between APNIC members, other RIR members, and between APNIC and other NIRs.
Day 2 Bob Ochieng - ICANN - IANA TransitionAdrian Hall
This document provides an overview of the IANA stewardship transition process and enhancing ICANN accountability process. It describes ICANN's role in managing domain names and IP addresses. It outlines the requirements for transition set by NTIA, including supporting the multistakeholder model. Two parallel processes were established - one to transition IANA functions and one to enhance ICANN accountability. Three operational communities (protocol parameters, numbers, and names) developed proposals. The names community proposal process involves design teams and public comments. The ICG will assess all proposals and develop a single transition proposal.
1) APNIC provides internet number resources and services to members in the Asia Pacific region.
2) IPv4 address transfers are now available between APNIC and ARIN regions, with an inter-RIR transfer procedure agreed upon.
3) APNIC conducted training and outreach activities in 2012 on topics like IPv6 deployment and conducted a member survey to help guide future priorities like resource registration and root server deployment in the region.
Similar to Update on-crisp-iana-stewardship-transition (20)
APNIC Foundation, presented by Ellisha Heppner at the PNG DNS Forum 2024APNIC
Ellisha Heppner, Grant Management Lead, presented an update on APNIC Foundation to the PNG DNS Forum held from 6 to 10 May, 2024 in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea.
Gen Z and the marketplaces - let's translate their needsLaura Szabó
The product workshop focused on exploring the requirements of Generation Z in relation to marketplace dynamics. We delved into their specific needs, examined the specifics in their shopping preferences, and analyzed their preferred methods for accessing information and making purchases within a marketplace. Through the study of real-life cases , we tried to gain valuable insights into enhancing the marketplace experience for Generation Z.
The workshop was held on the DMA Conference in Vienna June 2024.
Bridging the Digital Gap Brad Spiegel Macon, GA Initiative.pptxBrad Spiegel Macon GA
Brad Spiegel Macon GA’s journey exemplifies the profound impact that one individual can have on their community. Through his unwavering dedication to digital inclusion, he’s not only bridging the gap in Macon but also setting an example for others to follow.
Ready to Unlock the Power of Blockchain!Toptal Tech
Imagine a world where data flows freely, yet remains secure. A world where trust is built into the fabric of every transaction. This is the promise of blockchain, a revolutionary technology poised to reshape our digital landscape.
Toptal Tech is at the forefront of this innovation, connecting you with the brightest minds in blockchain development. Together, we can unlock the potential of this transformative technology, building a future of transparency, security, and endless possibilities.
1. Update on IANA Stewardship Transition
By
Mwendwa Kivuva
Date: 4th June 2015
2. Update on IANA
Stewardship Transition – AFRINIC22
AFRINIC team members:
Mwendwa Kivuva – University of Nairobi
Ernest Byaruhanga (Appointed RIR staff)
Janvier Ngnoulaye* – University of Yaounde
* Janvier Ngoulaye replaced
Alan Barrett in April 2015
2
3. • CRISP Team Update
• Next Steps
• Communication with other operation
communities
• Q&A
AGENDA
3
5. Required Principles of the new
proposals
• Support and enhance the multistakeholder
model
• Maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of
the Internet DNS
• Meet the needs and expectations of the global
customers and partners of the IANA services
• Maintain the openness of the Internet
5
6. Timelines – v9 April 2015
Activity Date
STEP 0 Request for communities to produce proposals 8 Sep 2014 – 20 Oct 2014
STEP 1 Communities develop proposals 8 Sep 2014 – 15 Jan 2015
STEP 2 ICG develops Draft Response 15 Jan 2015 – 13 Mar 2015
STEP 3 Communities Review of Draft response 13 Mar 2015 – 15 Mar 2015
STEP 4 Testing – demonstrate system can run as proposed 13 Mar 2015 – July 2015
STEP 5 ICG Develops final response 15 Mar 2015 – 19 Jun 2015
STEP 6 Final Response Review 19 Jun 2015 – 17 July 2015
STEP 7 Proposal Delivery 17 July 2015 – 31 July 2015
STEP 8 NTIA Approval 31 July 2015 – 30 Sep 2015
6
8. • June 2014 - IANA Stewardship Transition
Coordination Group (ICG) issues Request for
Proposals to three IANA “affected communities”
• Q4 2014 - Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship
Proposal Team (CRISP Team) established to
prepare an Internet numbers community
proposal. Global discussion platform established:
ianaxfer@nro.net
• January 2015 - Internet numbers community
IANA stewardship proposal submitted to the ICG
The Process
8
10. • IANA function stability and reliability: ICANN to continue as the IANA
Numbering Services Operator, orderly transition to another operator should
such need arise
• Replace the role of the NTIA with the RIRs (as representatives of RIR
communities): RIRs to establish a service level agreement with the IANA
Numbering Services Operator
• Establishment of a Review Committee: To review the performance of
IANA Numbering Services and advise the RIRs
• Clarify IPR-related issues: Intellectual property rights (IPR) related to the
provision of the IANA services stay with the community
Components of the Proposal
10
11. 1. Separation of policy development and operational roles.
The IANA Numbering Services Operator will merely execute the
global policies adopted according to the global Policy Development
Process defined in the ASO MoU.
2. Description of services provided to RIRs. The IANA
Numbering Services Operator will maintain the IANA Number
Registries and provide IANA Numbering Services to the RIRs in
accordance with the specific processes and timelines described in
this section of the agreement.
IANA SLA Principles *
* Section III.A.3. of the proposal
11
12. 3. Obligation to issue reports on transparency and
accountability. The IANA Numbering Services Operator will commit to
certain obligations so as to perform the function as expected by the
Internet Number Community and will be obliged to periodically issue
reports illustrating its compliance with the Internet Number
Community's expectations.
4. Security, performance and audit requirements. The IANA
Numbering Services Operator will commit to specific security
standards, metric requirements, and audit requirements and will be
obliged to periodically issue reports illustrating its compliance with
them.
IANA SLA Principles
13. 5. Review of the IANA operation. The RIRs will perform reviews to
assess whether the IANA Numbering Services Operator complies with
all requirements described in the agreement whenever they deem
appropriate. The IANA Numbering Services Operator will be obliged to
facilitate this review.
6. Failure to perform. If the IANA Numbering Services Operator fails
to perform as agreed, there will be specific consequences. One of
these consequences may be termination of the agreement.
7. Term and termination of contract. RIRs will be able to
periodically review the agreement and evaluate whether they want to
renew the agreement. Either party may terminate the agreement with
reasonable prior notice.
IANA SLA Principles
14. 8. Continuity of operations. If, at the end of the term, the RIRs
decide to sign an agreement for provision of IANA Numbering Services
by a different party, the previous IANA Numbering Services Operator
will be obliged to ensure an orderly transition of the function while
maintaining continuity and security of operations.
9. Intellectual property rights and rights over data. The contract
will implement the RIR community expectations as described in section
III.A.2.
10. Dispute resolution. Disputes between the parties related to the
SLA will be resolved through arbitration
11. Cost-based Fee. The fee is based on costs incurred by the IANA
Numbering Services Operator in providing the IANA Numbering
Service.
IANA SLA Principles
15. • Advise RIRs on review of the service level described in SLA
– Provide feedback from the community’s perspective
• Community representatives from each RIR service region
– Equal representation from each RIR service region
• The process of selecting representatives will be driven by the RIRs based on
open and bottom-up principles
Review Committee
15
16. • Each version of the proposal was shared on:
– The global <ianaxfer@nro.net> mailing list (open to anyone)
– NRO CRISP web page
– The CRISP Team members forwarded each version to each RIR community’s
mailing lists
• Feedback from the community was confirmed and discussed at every CRISP
Team teleconference
– The global <ianaxfer@nro.net> mailing list
– Feedback per RIR region (conveyed by the CRISP Team members)
• CRISP Team consideration for feedback shared on the <ianaxfer@nro.net>
mailing list/spreadsheet of issues list so that:
– Directions were clear to the community
– Further comments/clarification questions could be made if needed
Community Engagement by the
CRISP Team
16
17. • Some data/facts – Before proposal submission:
– 377 posts
– 53 unique posters
– Public archives of <ianaxfer@nro.net> mailing list available
• Support expressed for the proposal
– One poster requested adding more details on some of the proposal
components, but the suggestion failed to receive support from other posters
– Two comments to global icg-forum expressing concerns
• No objections for the proposal components
Feedback Received
17
18. • During the ICANN 52 Public Forum, ICANN Chair
Steve Crocker said that, in regards to the ICG
proposals from the numbers and protocol parameters
communities, the ICANN Board felt there was
“nothing fundamental in them that we have a
problem with, full stop.”
http://blog.apnic.net/2015/02/20/event-wrap-icann-
52/
ICANN Public Feedback
18
19. • High-level principles of the IANA Service Level Agreement
• Clarify that RIRs will consult their respective communities
during drafting of the SLA
• High-level principles in Review Committee selection
process
• Need for clarification of IANA intellectual property rights
Input that reached consensus
19
20. Input not incorporated
• Specify a particular jurisdiction/dispute resolution
mechanism
• Specify a particular selection process for the Review
Committee
• Incorporate SLA text as a part of the proposal
CRISP Proposal submitted to ICG on Jan 15th, 2015
21. • Analyse SLA for consistency with CRISP
proposal
• Liaise with the two other operational
communities for consistency in final output
by ICG
Next Steps
21
22. • CWG proposed a Post-Transition IANA (PTI) - separate
legal "wholly owned subsidiary" of ICANN. For
the IANA naming services, the creation of PTI ensures both
functional and legal separation within the
ICANN organization
• Contract between PTI and ICANN that would give PTI the
rights and obligations as the IANA Functions Operator.
• The IANA Functions would continue to reside within ICANN,
subject to accountability mechanisms already in existence
Communication with CWG
22
23. • It is “essential each operational community
be free to make independent arrangement
with an IFO including ability to chose the
IFO itself”
• PTI – CRISP is analyzing whether to
exchange SLA with ICANN or PTI
• PTI Board – Keep roles and structures
minimal. Should RIRs have representation?
CWG - CRISP response
23
24. • Budget for IFO: CRISP proposal had a fixed cost
paid annually to IFO
• Customer Standing Committee (CSC): Have a
mechanism for communication exchange with
NRO-Review Committee (NRO-RC). No role for
RIRs in CSC
• IPR: More dialogue needed between IETF, CCWG,
and CRISP
• Multi-stakeholder IANA Function Review team:
Restrict to names function only
CWG - CRISP response
24
25. • Intellectual property rights on IANA
trademark and IANA.org: Clarity needed
on these issues in case of a change of
IANA operator. IETF has no objection
– Section III.A.3 last paragraph: “The transfer of the
IANA trademark and IANA.ORG domain to the IETF Trust will
require additional coordination with the other affected
communities of the IANA Services, namely, protocol
parameters and names. It is the preference of the Internet
Numbers Community that all relevant parties agree to these
expectations as part of the transition.”
Communication with IETF
25
26. • Once an agreement has been reached on the
new oversight mechanism, the actual transition
process will begin.
When will transition occur?
26
SLA with ICANN
Review Committee will review ICANN’s adherence to the SLA, and report to NRO after a given period of time. At this point, RIRs are satisfied with the work ICANN has been doing.
1. RIRs can change the IANA operator if there are issues with the SLA. SLA is not the only condition for termination
4. All IPR related to numbering functions to be transferred to IETF trust.
ICANN publishes the IANA registries for anyone to use without charge, and it asserts no ownership or control of the information in the registries. No matter what additional structures are created, this basic rule must continue – ICANN Board Chairman Steve Crocker, on ianaplan@ietf.org on 5th May 2015
PTI – Origin, what it was to address, feedback on it ….