<div dir="ltr">Hi Thomas,<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:toml@communisphere.com" target="_blank">toml@communisphere.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#CCCCCC" text="#000000">
McTim,<br>
<br>
Perhaps you can assist me with a question relating to root
governance.<br>
<br>
When you say:<div class="im"><br>
<blockquote>These "decisions" are mainly minor administtrivia.
Changing the IP address of a ccTLDs nameserver for example.
When it comes to deciding what can go in the root, that is clearly
now the role of the GAC (see GAC Communnique's from Beijing,
Durban). <br>
</blockquote></div>
Thinking about our city's application for the .nyc TLD, I've been
looking at the NTIA-IANA contract, particularly C.2.9.2.d, which
says: (<span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-family:Arial;font-weight:normal">from</span><a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/sf_26_pg_1-2-final_award_and_sacs.pdf" style="text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-family:Arial;font-weight:normal">
</span><span style="font-size:15px;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(17,85,204);background-color:transparent;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:underline;vertical-align:baseline">http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/sf_26_pg_1-2-final_award_and_sacs.pdf</span></a>)<br>
<a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/sf_26_pg_1-2-final_award_and_sacs.pdf" style="text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:15px;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(17,85,204);background-color:transparent;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:underline;vertical-align:baseline"></span></a>
<blockquote>
<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.15;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-family:Arial;font-weight:normal">C.2.9.2d
Delegation and Redelegation of a Generic Top Level Domain
(gTLD) -- The Contractor shall verify that all requests
related to the delegation and redelegation of gTLDs are
consistent with the procedures developed by ICANN. In making a
delegation or redelegation recommendation, the Contractor must
provide documentation verifying that ICANN followed its own
policy framework including <u>specific documentation
demonstrating how the process provided the opportunity for
input from relevant stakeholders</u> and was supportive of
the global public interest. The Contractor shall submit its
recommendations to the COR via a Delegation</span><span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-family:Arial;font-weight:normal">
and Redelegation Report.</span><br>
</p>
</blockquote>
With New York only now considering ways to provide "<span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-family:Arial;font-weight:normal">the
opportunity for input from relevant stakeholders" I've been
seeking guidance from the nature of that review by IANA. Last week
I wrote to the COR (an NTIA official) and IANA asking how those
supportive of the .nyc TLD </span>might assure that the city's
application and outreach efforts meet the input requirements (see
attachment).<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Is this onus on you or on the "Contractor"? My reading suggests it is on the Contractor (which is of course ICANN).</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#CCCCCC" text="#000000">
<br>
As I understand it, IANA is now a "independent" entity within ICANN.
But I've been unable to find any detail about the nature of its
C.2.9.2.d review on its website. Any pointers on this would be
greatly appreciated. <br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>IANA is a function (or series of functions) that ICANN is currently responsible for doing. They have always been a separate "entity" in a variety of ways. </div>
<div><br></div><div>I have no pointers except Google, sorry. This may be of interest tho:</div><div><a href="http://www.iab.org/activities/programs/iana-evolution-program/">http://www.iab.org/activities/programs/iana-evolution-program/</a><br>
</div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#CCCCCC" text="#000000">
<br>
And isn't it IANA rather than GAC that decides what goes into the
root?<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Yes. and No. IANA makes decisions according to its documented procedures about a change to the root. However, in the current paradigm of new gTLDs, it is the GAC which gives advice to the BoD (and the BoD seems unwilling to disregard much of this advice). So if you are the .gcc applicant, from your perspective, it is the GAC who made the decision that you are unworthy. IANA had nothing to do with it!</div>
</div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Cheers,<br><br>McTim<br>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
</div></div>