[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