[Area 4] 40 items added

[Sivasubramanian M]

Dear Eric,

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Eric Brunner-Williams <
ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:

>  Siva,
>
> As a personal courtesy I would appreciate answers to few questions.
>
> In #23, in the phrase "the current IANA functions operator" might refer
> to some point in the future, e.g., after 2017, at which the IANA Functions
> might be conducted by some party other than the current contractor (ICANN),
> or it might refer to the current 2015 contractor (ICANN).
>
> It might be useful to clarify which, some entity not at present the IANA
> Functions contractor, or the present IANA Functions contractor, is
> hypothesized as litigating to prevent a change of the IANA Functions
> contract operator.
>

​These are imaginary scenarios, not to be read as alluding to a real,
existing or anticipated threat. In this imaginary scenario, "the current
IANA functions operator" refers to the present IANA functions operator,
rather impersonally. The preventive / mitigation strategy mentioned points
to this imaginary scenario of a threat of litigation from the present IANA
operator.
​


>
> What appears to be the same scenario appears, with more language, at #30.
>
> In #33, the Periodic Review Teams (PRT) sues the "Iana Contracting
> Entity". In neither the current Bylaws, Article IV, Section 4, which
> contains provisions for "periodic review", and subordinate documents
> (Methodology,  Systematization, etc.), nor in the Affirmation of
> Commitments can I find a delegation of legal incorporation authority to a
> Review Team.
>
> It might be useful to clarify which Review Teams may form legal persons
> and "sue" some third-party, e.g., the  current 2015 IANA Functions
> contractor (ICANN), and where this standing arises.
>



> In #26, #27 and #28, a Periodic Review Team appears to periodically select
> awardee(s) to one or more successor(s) to the current IANA Functions
> Contract. Is this a correct reading of these scenarios? If so, as with #33,
> it might be useful to clarify where the authority to award the successor(s)
> to the current IANA Functions Contract arises.
>

​
​Olivier
​came up with
 scenario
​s 26, 27, 28 as well as 33 among a few others​
. He would be in a better position to clarify. The message is copied to him.
​ ​
​


>
> I've copied the WS4 list simply to create a record of these questions
> outside of my cluttered mailer's archives, and "I don't know" is a
> reasonable answer, as these are among Olivier Crepin-LeBlond's
> contributions.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Eric Brunner-Williams
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability4/attachments/20150115/83c8b51b/attachment.html>