Dear all,
This short report and attached document aim to keep you informed as
to the developments involving IANA and the role that the RIPE NCC
is playing in this.
Discussions on the future of IANA are currently intensifying. During
the recent IETF meeting Rob Blokzijl and Daniel Karrenberg, on behalf
of the RIPE community, pursued this matter with all concerned.
The US government plans to continue funding IANA until September 1998,
at which time US government funding will definitely cease. The University
of Southern California still holds our initial contribution and will use it
if necessary.
Jon Postel is working on a plan to incorporate IANA as a legal entity and
to get support from IANA's direct users as well as the community at large.
Incorporation is planned for the first half of this year.
Consensus is emerging about the IANA services.
Attached is a position paper that Rob, Daniel and myself wrote and sent
as input for that process. This position paper can shortly be found on the
tld-wg and lir-wg websites.
A more detailed report including the latest
developments will be given at the RIPE meeting.
Regards
Paul Ridley
RIPE NCC Business Manager
____________________________________________________
Position Paper
on
IANA Structure
Rob Blokzijl
Daniel Karrenberg
Paul Ridley
Document: IANA-paper
Status
This document is a position paper reflected the
views of the three authors.
Scope
The intended audience for this position paper is all
interested parties concerned with the future struc-
ture of IANA. Comments to the authors are welcome.
1. Introduction
The position paper looks at the activities carried
out by IANA and at the direct users of these activi-
ties. A organisational structure for IANA is then
proposed based upon the principle of bottom-up gov-
ernance, in which the direct users of the IANA
activities govern IANA.
2. Activities
The activities that IANA now carries out have been,
and will continue to be, critical for the growth and
stability of the Internet. Since these activities
are critical they should stand central in any
____________________________________________________
IANA-paper.txt Page 1
Position Paper on IANA Structure
Blokzijl, Karrenberg, Ridley
____________________________________________________
discussion of the future structure of IANA. The
activities currently carried out by IANA are the
following:
2.1. Address Space Allocation and global policy forum
* Provides an address space allocation/registra-
tion service to the regional IRs (RIR).
* Provides a process to establish global address
space related policies.
* Establishes a process for arbitration of con-
flicts regarding these policies.
* Provides coordination services to RIRs.
2.2. DNS TLD Allocation and Registration; Operation of Root
Name Servers
* Registers all TLDs.
* Maintains root zone information.
* Allocates nTLDs. gTLDs are allocated in a pro-
cess outside IANA
* Operates root name servers (may be delegated to
individual operators).
2.3. Assigning Unique Parameters for Internet Protocols
* Assigns and registers other unique parameters.
2.4. RFC Editor
* Edits the RFC series of documents.
* Provides a repository for these documents.
2.5. Internet Monthly Report (IMR)
3. Activity users
Who are the direct users for these activities? It is
stressed that the focus should be on the *direct*
users as opposed to indirect users since persons
even remotely connected with the Internet community
could be classed as users. In order to allow scala-
bility direct users who are inherently accountable
(in good bottom-up fashion) to minor indirect users
need to be the focus.
____________________________________________________
IANA-paper.txt Page 2
Position Paper on IANA Structure
Blokzijl, Karrenberg, Ridley
____________________________________________________
If direct users are mapped to activities the follow-
ing direct user groupings appear.
3.1. IP number allocation, RIR coordination and global policy
forum
This activity has the following direct users:
* RIPE NCC
* ARIN
* AP-NIC
* Any future RIR
3.2. DNS TLD Allocation and Registration; Operation of Root
Name Servers
This activity has the following direct users:
* CORE
* Any future coordinating points for individual
TLD registries since individual representation
does not scale
3.3. Assigning unique parameters for Internet protocols
This activity has the following direct users:
* IETF
3.4. RFC editor
This activity has the following direct users:
* IETF
3.5. Internet Monthly Report (IMR)
This activity has the following direct users:
* The Internet community in general, however it
should be borne in mind that this activity is
very minor in comparison to the others. It
merely compliments them.
From this direct user to activity mapping it becomes
apparent that there are three main groupings of
direct users. They are the RIRs the TLD coordination
points (TLD Coord), and the IETF. It is apparent
that direct users are typically regional or global
____________________________________________________
IANA-paper.txt Page 3
Position Paper on IANA Structure
Blokzijl, Karrenberg, Ridley
____________________________________________________
entities. If at any time in the future other enti-
ties than those mentioned become direct users of the
IANA activities, then they should be recognised as
such.
In the discussion that follows this position paper
other direct user groups will probably be mentioned.
A few of these other groups are highlighted below
with a explanation of why it is thought that they
are not direct users but indirect users of the IANA
activities.
ISP's
By means of the global bottom-up structures
that are in place at the RIRs, the individual
ISP has a voice within his own RIR community;
the consensus of which the RIR brings to IANA.
TLD Registries
By means of the bottom up structures that are
in place in the case of CORE or in the process
of being started within the Regional areas (to
more or less degrees) the individual TLD reg-
istry has a voice within his own TLD Coord area
community; the consensus of which the TLD Coord
brings to IANA.
Industry
Industry is there to serve its client, normally
an individual ISP or TLD registry, who is
already represented by a direct user. If an
individual industry player wants to get more
involved then the option exists to put more
input into the IETF or the Regional technical
meetings which give advice to the RIRs.
Government
If, as is constantly espoused, the majority of
governments want the Internet to be self-regu-
lating then they should not be classed as
direct users influencing policy. Their rela-
tionship to the IANA activities is without
doubt that they are indirect users or an inter-
ested party.
End user or individual
An individual is always able to get involved in
the IETF or the Regional technical meetings
____________________________________________________
IANA-paper.txt Page 4
Position Paper on IANA Structure
Blokzijl, Karrenberg, Ridley
____________________________________________________
which give advice to the RIRs.
4. Direct user / IANA relations
IANA provides (if all of the activities are kept
within IANA) definite services to all three direct
user groupings; the RIRs, the TLD Coords, and IETF.
Thus the relationship between IANA and these groups
should be concrete and governing, in the same manner
as the RIRs relate with the ISPs in their region,
i.e. truly bottom-up. In such a structured relation-
ship only the three direct users would fund and gov-
ern the IANA activities.
5. Proposed IANA organisational structure principles
In order to be able to constructively discuss a pro-
posed structure for IANA the various organs of the
IANA organisation need to be defined. The aim here
is to be clear as to what a particular organ is and
does and not be discuss whether the name of a par-
ticular organ is appropriate or not. It is proposed
that there are three distinct organs in IANA; the
general council, the executive board, and the man-
agement.
General Council
This organ is the ruling organ in IANA and consists
of representatives from every direct user.
Executive Board
This organ is subordinate to the general council and
is responsible for the day-to-day governance of
IANA. The members of the executive board are elected
by the general council.
Management
This organ is subordinate to the executive board and
is responsible for daily operations of IANA. The
executive board hires the management
In general the three organs are expected to interact
in the following manner. All direct users have a
right to have a representative(s) on the general
council. Each individual direct user would be
responsible for how his representative(s) are cho-
sen. The general council being the ruling organ of
IANA would have the responsibility to adopt annual
accounts, budgets, charging schemes, and general
activities of IANA. General council members would
____________________________________________________
IANA-paper.txt Page 5
Position Paper on IANA Structure
Blokzijl, Karrenberg, Ridley
____________________________________________________
also be the sole funders of IANA.
The general council would elect the executive board
of approximately five members. The general council
would be allowed to elect general council represen-
tatives or external persons to be an executive board
member. The terms of executive board members would
be three years in a staggered rotation. The execu-
tive board being responsible for day-to-day gover-
nance would be responsible for, monitoring the
finances of IANA, ensuring appropriate business pro-
cedures are in place (including dispute procedures)
and being used, legally representing IANA, and
deciding upon IANAs activities within the mandate
given by the general council. The executive board
would report to the general council.
The executive board would hire a management compris-
ing of one or more persons. The management being
responsible for the day-to-day operations of IANA
would be responsible for IANA personnel hiring, exe-
cuting of all IANA activities, financial management.
The management would report to the executive board.
The proposed IANA organisational structure outlined
above is the governing structure. There could also
be an advisory structure that compliments the gov-
erning structure, but this advisory structure is not
a critical success factor in the setting up of IANA.
For that reason and to avoid complication, discus-
sion of an advisory structure is not a topic of this
position paper.
6. Open issues
There are many details of the the proposed organisa-
tion structure and operational rules that are not
covered above. These details, the open issues, many
well take time to agree upon but they are not insur-
mountable. The authors feel that it is more impor-
tant to first agree upon the organisation principles
as outlined in this position paper before delving
into the open issue details. Examples of open issues
that must be addressed are:
* although the direct users have been outlined in
general the specific direct users need to be
identified.
* what criteria will be used to determine how
many representatives each individual direct
user has in the general council.
____________________________________________________
IANA-paper.txt Page 6
Position Paper on IANA Structure
Blokzijl, Karrenberg, Ridley
____________________________________________________
* what mechanism will be used to elect executive
board members
* what is the usefulness of the IMR and can it be
developed
* what are the activity related budgets for IANA
* what mechanism is used to determine how much
each individual direct user is charged for the
IANA services.
7. Summary
The outline proposal given above is, in the opinion
of the authors, the fairest and most stable way of
structuring IANA in the future and thus gives most
stability to the Internet. This proposal is true to
the aim of global bottom-up governance within the
Internet and is definitely global industry self-reg-
ulating. By following a true bottom-up model (i.e.
governance and funding by the direct users) democ-
racy is enhanced together with the crucial impar-
tiality of IANA. If parties other than the direct
users were structurally able to fund and influence
the IANA activities then this bottom-up democratic
aim would not be achieved and more importantly the
crucial impartiality of IANA would be questionable.
____________________________________________________
IANA-paper.txt Page 7
