I am writing to provide my input on the review of the RZERC Charter. I have read the Initial Report and I have some comments and suggestions.

I commend the RZERC for its work and dedication to ensuring the stability and security of the DNS root zone. However, I believe that the Charter could be improved in several ways.

First, the Charter is somewhat ambiguous in some areas. For example, the Charter does not clearly define what constitutes a "major architectural change" to the DNS root zone. This could lead to confusion and uncertainty about when the RZERC should be consulted. I recommend that the Charter be revised to provide a more precise definition of "major architectural change."

One way to do this would be to define a "major architectural change" as any change that could have a significant impact on the stability or security of the DNS root zone. This could include changes to the DNS protocol, changes to the DNS root zone database, or changes to the DNS root zone infrastructure.

The CWG-Stewardship Proposal defines a "major architectural change" as any change that could have a significant impact on the stability or security of the DNS root zone. This definition is more precise than the definition in the RZERC Charter, and it would help to ensure that the RZERC is consulted on all major changes to the DNS root zone.

Second, the Charter does not specify how the RZERC members are selected, appointed, removed, or replaced. This could lead to a lack of transparency and accountability in the RZERC's membership process. I recommend that the Charter be revised to include clear and transparent rules and procedures for RZERC membership.

The CWG-Stewardship Proposal recommends that the RZERC be a multistakeholder body that is representative of the DNS community. The Proposal also recommends that the RZERC have a clear and transparent mandate, and that the RZERC be accountable to the DNS community.

I believe that the recommendations in the CWG-Stewardship Proposal would improve the RZERC's Charter and make it more effective in carrying out its mission. I welcome further dialogue or feedback on my input.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Daniel Getahun

https://features.icann.org/revised-expected-standards-behavior

https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/initial-report-on-the-rzerc-charter-review-27-03-2023

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-rzerc-charter-10jun16-en.pdf

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-with

out-annexes-22apr15-en.pdf

- I appreciate the RZERC's work and dedication to ensuring the stability and security of the DNS root zone, which is a critical resource for the global Internet.

- I suggest that the Charter be revised to provide a more precise definition of "major architectural change" to the DNS root zone, based on the CWG-Stewardship Proposal's definition. This would help to avoid confusion and uncertainty about when the RZERC should be consulted, and ensure that the RZERC is aware of all changes that could have a significant impact on the stability or security of the DNS root zone. Such changes could include changes to the DNS protocol, changes to the DNS root zone database, or changes to the DNS root zone infrastructure.

- I suggest that the Charter be revised to include clear and transparent rules and procedures for RZERC membership, based on the CWG-Stewardship Proposal's recommendations. This would help to ensure that the RZERC is a multistakeholder body that is representative of the DNS community, and that the RZERC members are selected, appointed, removed, or replaced in a fair and accountable manner.

- I believe that these revisions would enhance the RZERC's effectiveness, legitimacy, and accountability to the DNS community, and contribute to the maintenance of a stable and secure DNS root zone.