[Area 4] Business Constituency Stress Test #1

[Steve DelBianco]

Eric — I think we have a fundamental disconnect on the meaning and purpose of stress tests.  You keep asking about past events, or about why we believe a scenario WOULD happen.

But the purpose of scenarios/stress tests is to design plausible situations that help us test accountability mechanisms we have now or are proposing to create.   Stress tests are not predictive.  We do not need to justify a scenario, or show why it is likely to happen.

Nor do we want to be preoccupied with past events.  Indeed, the benefit of doing future scenarios is that we avoid fighting over our differing interpretations of past events.

As a software guy, you need more than high-level principles to develop an application.  Programming requires anticipating scenarios where users don't follow the expected routine.  For non-programmers, here's an analogy: It's a good principle to practice safe driving in winter weather. It's a scenario to prepare for and respond to a specific situation, such as having your car spin sideways on a snow-covered road.

Steve


From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net<mailto:ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net>>
Date: Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 3:13 PM
To: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco at netchoice.org>>, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>, Thomas Rickert <rickert at anwaelte.de<mailto:rickert at anwaelte.de>>, "\"leonfelipe at sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> >> León Felipe Sánchez Ambía\"" <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>>
Cc: "ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org>" <ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org>>
Subject: Business Constituency Stress Test #1

Steve,

Members of the Business Constituency are aware that on November 10, 2011, the Department of Commerce issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) SA1301-12-RP-IANA for a new IANA functions contract with a deadline of December 19, 2011.

Members of the Business Constituency are also aware that the government reserved the right to cancel any solicitation that did not meet the requirements _requested_by_the_global_community_ (emphasis added).

Members of the Business Constituency are also aware that the government canceled this RFP because no proposals were received that met the requirements requested.

Members of the Business Constituency are also aware that the only proposal received by the government for that RFP was the proposal submitted by the Corporation.

Could you clarify why the Business Constituency believes that the government might "choose to terminate the Affirmation of Commitments", apparently an expression of the requirements requested by the global community?

Similarly, you clarify why the Business Constituency believes that the Corporation might "choose to terminate the Affirmation of Commitments", again, apparently an expression of the requirements requested by the global community?

Thanks in advance for the clarifications.

Eric Brunner-Williams
Eugene, Oregon

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability4/attachments/20150111/15d877b4/attachment-0001.html>