Skip to main content

Cheers to the Multistakeholder Community

1st october webbanner c 02 icannorg 492x279

Two and a half years ago, the ICANN multistakeholder Community embarked on a journey to develop a globally agreed on plan to transition the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s (NTIA) stewardship of the IANA functions to the global Internet Community. The process signaled the historic final step in transitioning the coordination and management of the Internet’s unique identifiers to the private-sector that began with the formation of ICANN in 1998.

The process to develop the package of transition proposals embodied the spirit of the Internet itself – global, diverse and inclusive. People from different economic sectors, cultures, interests and backgrounds worked together to develop two consensus proposals that ensure the continued stable and secure operation of the IANA services and an enhanced accountability for ICANN. One of the proposals focused on ICANN’s transparency and accountability. The other focused on arrangements with the three operational communities, the Regional Internet Registries for numbers, the Internet Engineering Task Force for protocol parameters, and the top-level domain registries for names.

The proposal development process reflected the Community’s dedication and commitment to achieving this historic final step. The community spent hundreds of hours in calls and meetings and exchanged tens of thousands of emails exploring and discussing complex governance issues, debating different views, and eventually finding consensus. This process tested and strengthened the trust in and across the ICANN community, and is a good demonstration of global multistakeholder policy development working. The resulting package of proposals has broad support because it reflects the Community’s work, and preserves the existing multistakeholder system while laying the foundation for a more accountable and equitable balance within the ICANN ecosystem.

Today, after months of preparation and implementation of the community’s tasks, ICANN’s contract with NTIA expired. As a result, the coordination and management of the Internet’s unique identifiers is now privatized and in the hands of the volunteer-based multistakeholder community.

The transition will help to ensure the continuation of a single, open Internet that users around the world can rely on for years to come. I am honored to be ICANN’s Chairman of the Board during this historic process.

The operational mechanisms and enhanced accountability frameworks outlined in the proposals are enshrined in ICANN’s new Bylaws, which are now in effect. The ICANN Community, Board and organization will now move forward together as a more accountable and transparent body. These changes, while vitally important for the relationships and management of ICANN, will have no visible effect on the operation of the Internet. The very large ecosystem of Internet System Providers, content providers and users will continue to function without change.

Thank you all again for your work throughout this process. I look forward to our ongoing collaboration on further accountability and transparency enhancements in Work Stream 2 of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability, and everything else yet to come.


    ronald baione-doda  12:52 UTC on 01 October 2016

    The whistlebower process at ICANN is insufficient in my opinion until there is an explanation of that process provided to the public, no one has publicly explained what the whistleblower process is, how can you possibly transfer oversight of anything without first ensuring the entire process. Will websites like Wikileaks be the only public awareness method available? Human rights organizations should have been included as whistleblower contacts on a randomly selected monthly basis to provide another method for the multistakeholders within the post-transition process to alert the public to necessary information regarding nefarious external influences. Nice work by the media by the way, not a single article written about the current "3rd party phone call based ICANN whistleblower process", as was explained in a sentence or two to ICANN accountability participants, that should have been an obvious human rights issue. When Wikileaks or a similar website is reporting on undue influence on ICANN's multistakeholder post-transition process, I will have been proven correct in my arguments. The process of creating the framework for the proposal was not a bottom-up process, it was a top-down exclusionary agenda that harshly excluded new participants who simply wanted to discuss and learn about topics such as the ICANN whistleblower process. Read for yourself: Public Archives:

    ronald baione-doda  12:16 UTC on 20 October 2016

    I recommend anyone who wishes to find out what the whistleblower process is at ICANN to contact the NTIA DOC spokesperson/representative at the Department of Commerce Public Affairs office.

    ronald baione-doda  13:10 UTC on 20 October 2016

    And check out this link for the ongoing "Workstream 2 process to improve the hotline procedure" Section 3 of the latest PDF from October 18th shows that the recommendations should be implemented by June 2017. So from October 2016 to at least June 2017 the internet has been transferred to a group with no updated whistleblower process. Read through that document and ask yourself whether or not it was a responsible action to transfer the internet without first having an effective whistleblower process in place.

    ronald baione-doda  13:35 UTC on 20 October 2016

    The recommendations for the updated whistleblower process focus only on building trust in the internally controlled 'hot-line' to call to report, if anyone remembers recently Wells Fargo had an internally controlled hotline, and that didn't work well, the internet is an important entity, how can it be possible that after a 9 month delay the only solution to the process will be building trust in an internal phone number to call process that therefore is not an effective process?

    blogdechollos  11:02 UTC on 20 February 2017

    Thank you too!

Domain Name System
Internationalized Domain Name ,IDN,"IDNs are domain names that include characters used in the local representation of languages that are not written with the twenty-six letters of the basic Latin alphabet ""a-z"". An IDN can contain Latin letters with diacritical marks, as required by many European languages, or may consist of characters from non-Latin scripts such as Arabic or Chinese. Many languages also use other types of digits than the European ""0-9"". The basic Latin alphabet together with the European-Arabic digits are, for the purpose of domain names, termed ""ASCII characters"" (ASCII = American Standard Code for Information Interchange). These are also included in the broader range of ""Unicode characters"" that provides the basis for IDNs. The ""hostname rule"" requires that all domain names of the type under consideration here are stored in the DNS using only the ASCII characters listed above, with the one further addition of the hyphen ""-"". The Unicode form of an IDN therefore requires special encoding before it is entered into the DNS. The following terminology is used when distinguishing between these forms: A domain name consists of a series of ""labels"" (separated by ""dots""). The ASCII form of an IDN label is termed an ""A-label"". All operations defined in the DNS protocol use A-labels exclusively. The Unicode form, which a user expects to be displayed, is termed a ""U-label"". The difference may be illustrated with the Hindi word for ""test"" — परीका — appearing here as a U-label would (in the Devanagari script). A special form of ""ASCII compatible encoding"" (abbreviated ACE) is applied to this to produce the corresponding A-label: xn--11b5bs1di. A domain name that only includes ASCII letters, digits, and hyphens is termed an ""LDH label"". Although the definitions of A-labels and LDH-labels overlap, a name consisting exclusively of LDH labels, such as"""" is not an IDN."