Name:  Guo  Feng      Organization:  CAICT    Submission  ID:  80    Hi  Sir/Madam,    CHINA  ACEDEMY  OF  ICT  would  put  forward  comments  on  IANA  Stewardship  Transition  Proposal.      Please  check  document  enclosed.  The  document  is  in  Chinese  version.  We  assume  that  the  resources  will  be  allocated  for  the  translation.        Thanks  a  lot.    
Guo  Feng  Comments  about  the  Proposal  for  the  Transition  of  IANA  Oversight  Function    Given  by  the  China  Academy  of  Information  and  Communications  Technology    (September  2015)    The  IANA  Stewardship  Coordination  Group  (ICG)  published  an  updated  proposal  for  the  transition  of  IANA  oversight  functions  in  July.  The  China  Academy  of  Information  and  Communications  Technology  (CAICT)  appreciates  that  the  ICG  has  integrated  the  three  sub-­‐proposals  of  domain  names,  protocol  parameters  and  numbers,  including  responses  to  communities'  requests.  CAICT  would  like  to  take  this  opportunity  to  express  its  thankfulness  to  ICG,  CWG-­‐Stewardship,  CRISP  Team,  IANAPLAN  WG  members  and  other  parties  who  put  forth  their  efforts  and  contributions  on  behalf  of  the  proposal,  and  we  would  like  to  give  the  following  comments  on  the  current  integrated  proposal:      Firstly,   considering   the   importance   of   IANA   oversight   function   transition,   in   order  to   fully   listen   to   the   comments   from   Internet   communities   globally,   we   suggest  that  the  commenting  time  be  appropriately  extended  and  that  the  stakeholders  be  encouraged  to  give  comments  through  various  means.      Secondly,  we  reiterated  that  ICANN  and  PTI  play  an  important  role  in  the  operation  and   management   of   Internet   critical   resources,   and   to   some   extent   they   take  responsibility   for   the   global   public   services   to   some   extent.   Therefore,   to   further  enhance  accountability  and  transparency,  ICANN  and  PTI  should  take  the  following  affair  as  the  important  working  direction  and  establish  system  safeguards:  breaking  away  from  the  United  States  legal  system  so  as  not  to  be  controlled  by  any  single  country  or  group.      Thirdly,  we  note  that  this  transition  proposal  has  further  explained  the  mechanisms  of  CSC,  PTI,  IFR  and  others.  We  hope  that  the  member  composition  of  these  mechanisms  is  rational  in  order  to  ensure  the  safe,  stable  operation  of  IANA  functions  as  well  as  the  accountability  and  transparency  of  the  IANA  oversight  function.  The  member  composition  of  these  mechanisms  should  take  the  following  factors  into  account:  professional  knowledge,  geographical  balance,  community  representation,  conflict  of  interest,  gender  balance,  etc.    being  primarily  assigned  by  the  ICANN  Board  or  management.  The  member  composition  of  the  CSC  and  IFR  should  ensure  the  broad  representativeness  and  perform  effective  oversight  of  the  operation  of  IANA  functions.  The  representatives  from  the  IDN  registries  should  occupy  seats  in  the  CSC.    
Fourthly,  the  institution  that  is,  in  the  future,  responsible  for  the  daily  technology  operation  of  IANA  functions  should  be  subject  to  the  mandatory  constraints.  We  should  grant  the  Internet  communities  the  right  to  replace  the  IANA  functions  operator,  but  we  should  not  make  special  arrangements  in  order  to  grant  a  certain  organization  the  right  to  permanently  operate  IANA  functions.  We  suggest  the  further  clarification  of  whether  the  reviewing  decisions  or  comments  from  IFR  and  Special  IFR  are  mandatory  to  PTI,  and  that  the  manner  in  which  to  ensure  that  the  reviewing  comments  from  IFR  and  Special  IFR  can  be  implemented  be  made  clear.