Send ARIN-consult mailing list submissions to

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

You can reach the person managing the list at

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ARIN-consult digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Consultation on Open ACSP Suggestions (John Curran)
   2. Re: ASO Review Consultation 2018 (Jason Schiller)


Message: 1
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 17:48:13 +0000
From: John Curran <>
To: Owen DeLong <>
Cc: "<>" <>
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Consultation on Open ACSP Suggestions
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On 11 Apr 2018, at 1:34 PM, Owen DeLong <> wrote:
> John,
> The first question in the survey is an utter failure from my perspective as I 
> don?t see priorities in terms of categories.
> There are some things in each category which I consider relatively higher 
> priority vs. other things in those same categories.

Owen - 

Rather than have everyone be forced to prioritize 24 items individually (not a 
quick task at all), it was felt that having them prioritize a smaller set of 
categories would yield a higher response rate.   Given your desire for more 
detailed input, please complete the both the first survey question (as best you 
are able), and then also complete the rating of relative importance of open 
suggestions in each category which follows.


John Curran
President and CEO


Message: 2
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:27:34 +0000
From: Jason Schiller <>
Cc: Bill Woodcock <>, "<>"
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] ASO Review Consultation 2018
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

*Woody and Alyssa make three very good points.1. When NTIA stepped away
from oversight of ICANN, we (names, numbers and protocols communities) had
to figure out how the community would take over that oversight.  The
numbers community sorted this issue by:- the RIRs paying directly for the
IANA numbers services operations- having an SLA for IANA numbers services
operations - having an IANA Review Committee which    - is made up from the
community    - ensure bottom up, community involvement in assessing that
the IANA       numbers services operations meet the needs of the numbers
community. 2. The ASO is an ICANN ?supporting organization (SO)? and as
such, it gets dragged into a lot of ICANN work as a matter of convention,
like any other ICANN supporting organization (SO) or ICANN advisory
committee (AC).   Most of this work has no direct relevance to global
number policy, number policy in general, or the numbers community.  The
amount of work has increased dramatically in the post IANA transition phase
as names community tries to sort out proper community oversight (which the
numbers community has already addressed -- see point 1).3. The important
work of the ASO, supporting global policy and recognition of new RIRs
happens sporadically and infrequently.While the new SLA and oversight
through the community supported IANA Review Committee has greatly reduced
the dependency of the numbers community on ICANN, it has not in any way
changed the responsibility, role, or importance of the ASO AC.The work of
shepherding global policy remains unchanged with the addition of the IANA
SLA and the IANA RC.  While that work still depends on ratification of the
ICANN board, then it must be completed within the ICANN system.   If global
policy is no longer ratified by the ICANN board, then the work of
shepherding global policy would need to be recreated outside the ICANN
system. Likely this means chartering the NRO NC, building the appropriate
operating procedures, and figuring out what interaction and community
oversight is needed with the new ratifying party.This leaves me with two
questions:1. What is the value of keeping names, numbers, and protocols
under the single umbrella of ICANN?  Is the value that ICANN provides worth
the level of work that an ICANN Supporting Organization or Advisory
Committee requires?2. If not, then can we get ICANN to recognize the
strange nature of the ASO, and ensure ICANN strives to limit ASO
involvement to only things that impact global numbers policy, and the
numbers community in general?  This means ICANN will necessarily need to
carve out the ASO from the things that normal parts of ICANN participate
in, and restrict changes to the by-laws to not impact the ASO except when
they specifically relate to the numbers community and in those cases the
involvement of the ASO in developing those rules is required.  If the
answer to both of these are no, then we must seek to move global policy
ratification, and hence the global policy shepherding work outside ICANN.  *

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 5:34 PM Alyssa Moore <> wrote:

> It has taken me over two years to wrap my head around the
> responsibilities, structure and difference between the ASO, ASO AC, NRO,
> and NRO EC.
> I have to agree with Woody here on redundancy.
> Regarding clarity and complexity, it still remains unclear that the ASO is
> an ICANN Supporting Organization, whose functions are carried out by the
> NRO, and that the NRO NC and the ASO AC are the same people. And that the
> NRO EC is part of the ASO, but is separate from the ASO AC, etc.
> The ASO also plays an advisory role, and not a policy development role
> like the other two Supporting Organizations within ICANN. If it?s an
> advisory role, shouldn?t it be an Advisory Committee? Or why can?t that
> advice come from outside the ICANN structure from the NRO itself? To that
> end, the vast majority of RIR policy development is all done outside the
> constraints of the ICANN system on a regional basis.
> The new IANA SLA replaces the ASO MoU in terms of defining the
> relationship between ICANN and the RIRs, which has moved away from policy
> development and coordination toward an operator/clients relationship. The
> primary role of the ASO - forwarding global policy proposals for
> ratification to the ICANN Board - is an extremely rare occurrence. Does
> there need to be a supporting organization for that work? The NRO performs
> this policy coordination function already.
> All of that being said, despite the increased volunteer time required in
> the wake of the Empowered Community, I must say the ASO is probably one of
> the more efficient creatures of ICANN considering the sheer number of
> network operators it represents.
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 9:46 AM Bill Woodcock <> wrote:
>> > On Feb 2, 2018, at 5:59 AM, ARIN <> wrote:
>> >
>> > As a part of the Number Resource Organization (NRO), ARIN is seeking
>> > community input on the NRO community consultation on the ASO review.
>> Now that there?s a contractual relationship with the IANA Functions
>> Operator, with its own heavyweight oversight process in place, the ASO/AC
>> is completely redundant, since it interfaces with ICANN, and unlike the
>> Names community, we and Protocols don?t do our policymaking within ICANN,
>> we do it ourselves.  So, no reason to continue to have an ASO/AC.  It would
>> just be looking for a purpose and confusing people.
>>                                 -Bill
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-Consult
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
>> Consult Mailing
>> List (
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> Please contact the
>> ARIN Member Services
>> Help Desk at if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Consult
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Consult Mailing
> List (
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact the
> ARIN Member Services
> Help Desk at if you experience any issues.

Jason Schiller|NetOps||571-266-0006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...


Subject: Digest Footer

ARIN-consult mailing list


End of ARIN-consult Digest, Vol 67, Issue 24

Reply via email to