Here is my personal take away from the ICG meeting and the general discussion:
Note Aagain that this is about the arrangements for the *implementation* of a very small but important function that *implements* policies that govern Internet number distribution; roughly it is about the work of IANA delegating blocks of number spaces to the RIRs. The policies themselves are not discussed in this process and they are not expected to change. Neither is the policy development process discussed and neither is that expected to change. This is purely about the small part of *implementation* of global policies. The bulk of the Internet number related policies are implemented by the RIRs and the LIRs (ISPs) according to regional policies. This is not going to change. Finally I personally expect that the same people will continue performing this work for the time being, but under new arrangements. So we can expect operational stability. The time schedule that is emerging means that the RIPE community will have to come to consensus on a proposal by the end of this year. Many believe that the window of opportunity for change will close if NTIA chooses to renew the current arrangements with ICANN unchanged. Specifically the IETF is pushing hard to meet this deadline and at this moment no-one is questioning it. The IETF has done most of the preparatory work already and their arrangements with IANA are well defined and documented. So I expect that the IETF will decide to move ahead on their own if the other communities are not ready in time. Our proposal will have to explain the current arrangements under which IANA implements the global policies for Internet number distribution, essentially the arrangements under which IANA hands block of numbers to the RIRs. We should spend time on reminding ourselves of this first, so that the discussion about future arrangements stays focused. Then we need to agree on the proposed arrangements for a future time when NTIA does no longer hold a contract with ICANN for this work. Then we will need to describe explicitly how this proposal meets the accountability requirements of the RIPE community. We have to be aware that concurrently this discussion will be happening in the other regions and the result must be a proposal that has consensus in all the regions. Finally we have to take into consideration that it is likely that at least one of the domain name communities will not make the deadline. So we will have to generate a proposal that will stand alone. We will also have to consider what to do when it becomes clear that not everyone will be ready in time. As I have said in our Warsaw meeting: personally I strongly believe we should at least develop viable options for such an eventuality. The least this will do is to encourage the other communities to work harder on meeting the schedule. Apologies for the long and difficult prose during the summer months. If anything is unclear, I am happy to expand even further ;-). Daniel
