[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on the Mission statement
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Fri Nov 20 17:31:46 UTC 2015
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:06:38PM -0500, Greg Shatan wrote:
> As stated in the provision, a "service" for the purpose of this clause is "any
> software process that accepts connections for the Internet) that use the
> Internet's unique identifiers." As such, it is clearly incorrect to say
> that "registrars/registries" are "services that use the Internet's unique
> identifiers.""
I'm afraid I disagree. This was the worry I tried to raise when I
first suggested that language, and I noted in the chat for the call
the other day. Whois (and RDAP when it's deployed) is clearly a
software process that accepts connections from the Internet. EPP is
also that. So is http(s), which is how most registrars interact with
their customers; there are definitely rules about what they have to
offer there (e.g. whois data over http -- there are even rules about
what such data has to say). There is in fact an argument to be made
here.
I accept Becky's argument that the futher clarification that ICANN
could enter into contracts to support the registration services is
enough to counteract all this, but I can see why someone would be
worried.
This is really why I think the "not a regulator" and "can undertake
contracts" sentences, however we write them, are dangerous here. The
basic restriction to enumerated powers is already in place, and I
think these two sentences are going to be fantastically hard to write
correctly for our meaning without causing some sort of side effect. I
remain unconvinced they're either necessary or a good idea.
Best regards,
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list