[CWG-RFP3] Is there is a more suitable legal jurisdiction for an IANA subsidiary?

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

Dear Chuck,

my questions were actually quite genuine as I do not know the extent to
which the GDD is separated from ICANN. From your reply, it appears that
it is not at all. The Ombudsman, on the other hand, is not just
firewalled - I believe that his set-up is completely independent & under
NZ law. Some people here know a lot more about that since they
investigated this so I'll let them contribute.
Kind regards,

Olivier

On 03/11/2014 19:52, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> I assume your questions are rhetorical Olivier.  I think the only function within ICANN that is firewalled  and has different staff and separate location is the Ombudsman.  One of the reasons the ICANN Finance team says it is very challenging to separate costs for different functions is that the costs are incurred by different organizational units in ICANN.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cwg-rfp3-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-rfp3-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 1:12 PM
> To: Paul M Kane; Greg Shatan
> Cc: RFP3
> Subject: Re: [CWG-RFP3] Is there is a more suitable legal jurisdiction for an IANA subsidiary?
>
>
> On 03/11/2014 19:07, Paul M Kane wrote:
>> It would be appropriate to emphasise the importance of keeping IANA as 
>> a separate/independent/fire-walled service unit within ICANN.
> Is this what the GDD is within ICANN? Firewalled, different staff, entirely separate floor of the building etc. ?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Olivier
> _______________________________________________
> Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
> Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3
>

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html