[CCWG-ACCT] Budget power - two new suggestions

[Jordan Carter]

Hi all

I've been hearing some concern from the Numbers and Protocols communities
regarding how any veto of the IANA Budget might affect their IANA services.
The notion that the Names community should through its Community Mechanism
or planning process make decisions on that leaves some nervous.

So my first suggestion is: *what if we change the decision-maker for a
veto/reconsideration of the IANA Functions to a specific group created for
that purpose, with representation from the Names, Numbers and Protocols
communities*? Leave aside the question of enforceability for the moment and
think about the principle.

My second suggestion for debate, and I realise this is not going to be
everyone's cup of tea, is: if we can make the IANA budget
veto/reconsideration workable as per suggestion 1, *could we defer the veto
part of the ICANN budget debate for WS2, and simply do the incorporation of
enhanced community feedback and challenge along the lines the Board
proposed*? Would that meet our requirements (can we get it done after WS1
given other WS1 powers being enforceable)? Would it meet the CWG's
requirements?


I am in solution mode with this email, hope it is helpful.

best
Jordan

-- 
Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
*InternetNZ*

+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Skype: jordancarter
Web: www.internetnz.nz

*A better world through a better Internet *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151009/1bedfbb6/attachment.html>