Public Comment CloseStatement


Assigned Working Group


Call for
Comments Open
Call for
Vote OpenVote CloseDate of SubmissionStaff Contact and EmailStatement Number

01 June 2020


12Y, 0A, 0N


27 May 2020

29 May 2020

01 June 2020

04 June 2020

01 June 2020


Hide the information below, please click here 


The final version to be submitted, if the draft is ratified, will be placed here by upon completion of the vote. 


The final draft version to be voted upon by the ALAC will be placed here before the vote is to begin.


The first draft submitted will be placed here before the call for comments begins. The Draft should be preceded by the name of the person submitting the draft and the date/time. If, during the discussion, the draft is revised, the older version(S) should be left in place and the new version along with a header line identifying the drafter and date/time should be placed above the older version(s), separated by a Horizontal Rule (available + Insert More Content control).

1 Comment

  1. Holly Raiche Ricardo Holmquist , apologies for weighing in late.

    Here are some comments for consideration, following the order set out in the draft submitted for comments.

    1. Knowledge and understanding of what PTI is and does

    • Instead of "Knowledge and understanding of what PTI is and does" as a sub-header, consider using "Awareness of PTI's mandate and remit"
    • 1st para: I don't know what "targeted incomes" is being referred to, I suspect "targeted outcomes" to be the correct term
    • Not sure that referring to one targeted outcomes under Objective One and a identified risk under Objective Five is optimal, for eg. then why omit the targeted outcome under Objective Five, "ICANN org and community aligned and educated about ICANN and PTI's remit in regards to the performance of the IANA functions." which is also relevant to this thread?
    • To retain support for an awareness campaign (to which I don't disapprove), then consider dropping reference to "may be a lack of knowledge of what PIT is and does ...." and just say, these targeted outcome(s) and identified risk point to an important need for the publicizing of the critical role of PTI along with its remit in performing the naming function -- Note: better to say "performing the naming function" than "implementation of the naming function".

    2. Input into the development of ICANN policies

    • Not sure why privacy issues are being singled out in respect of risks for Objective One; I would have thought fragmentation and possibility of IANA becoming irrelevant to the global interoperability of the Internet due to an inability to keep up with new and evolving technologies and competitors are at least just as important. 
    • The subsisting IANA Naming Function Contract already provides in Section 4.5 "[that PTI shall] not publicly initiate, advance or advocate any policy development related to the IANA Naming Function. ...[but] may (i) respond to requests for information requested by Interested and Affected Parties, and, at PTI’s volition, provide objective information to customers, in each case, to inform ongoing policy discussions, (ii) request guidance or clarification as necessary for the performance of the IANA Naming Function, and (iii) publish, contribute to or comment on any document related to ongoing policy discussions, provided that, in the case of clause (iii), the primary purpose of such publication, contribution or commentary is to supply relevant IANA Naming Function experience and insight."

      So are we saying that PTI should develop clear procedures to seek and capitalize on opportunities to inform the development or implementation of policies which PTI believes will impact its performance of the naming functions?