[CCWG-ACCT] Do we need a unified post-transition IANA?

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:08:22PM +0000, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> In my view, the reason this has been resisted, is that the ICANN
> Establishment would see this as a threat to the larger 'empire' it has
> created.

I'm not really sure why this list is the correct place to discuss
post-transition arrangements for IANA -- even for names -- given that
ICANN has a whole working group talking about that very topic.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com