[CWG-RFP3] Option 5 - New IANA Entity

[Seun Ojedeji]

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>  Kurt
>
> I see where you’re coming from now. .......
>
>  The contract NTIA awarded _*requires*_ ICANN to maintain the separation.
> The contract is _*going away*_. Without some kind of new oversight
> authority or contracting authority, there is nothing to maintain this
> separation.
>

A good summary of the task at hand which also implies the following:

- That there is a form of separation currently existing
- This form of separation is made possible by the contract
- A process/mechanism that ensure current separation is maintained is the
required task.

Hopefully we can always come back to Milton's statement above to remind
ourselves about the task at hand.

Thanks

Cheers!

>
>
>
>
> *From:* Kurt Pritz [mailto:kpritz at thedna.org]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 11, 2014 1:32 PM
> *To:* Milton L Mueller; RFP3
> *Subject:* Re: [CWG-RFP3] Option 5 - New IANA Entity
>
>
>
> Hi Milton:
>
>
>
> I have a few points:
>
>
>
> First, your argument, that that the CWG should consider different
> separation models because it is not explicitly excluded, is not sound. If
> the criteria are explicit (and I agree with you that they are) then we
> cannot argue for and should not be adding criteria because it has not been
> excluded.  I.e., your statement that "'don't have a separate IANA entity'
> isn't among [the existing criteria]" is not a reason for adding criteria.
> By that reason, we could include anything. The argument would be more
> powerful of the criteria were not explicit but they are explicit.
>
>
>
> Also, there is a current contractual requirement for the separation of the
> policy and operations duties and it is satisfied.  The NTIA included that
> term AND awarded the contract to ICANN because the NTIA was satisfied
> through their due diligence that the separation could be maintained within
> ICANN. ICANN has agreed with that term and is in compliance with the
> contract or the NTIA would not be relinquishing its oversight role.
>
>
>
> Since separation is a requirement, it COULD be the subject of oversight:
> "has ICANN maintained separation between the policy and operations?"
>
>
>
> Finally, Vint said: "keep it simple." There is real peril in broadening
> the criteria. Most simply, this is a discussion of IANA Oversight
> Transition, not IANA Transition. There is a time for the discussion of the
> separation model but this isn't it.
>
>
>
> Respectfully,
>
>
>
> Kurt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 11, 2014, at 8:41 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>   This is just wrong, Donna. The criteria the NTIA set are quite explicit
> and open and “don’t have a separate IANA entity” isn’t among them. More
> generally, as a principle, we should do that we think is best within the
> criteria, and not try to second-guess what the NTIA wants, or claim to be
> channeling the inner wishes of the NTIA. That makes for a distorted
> dialogue.
>
>
>
> *From:* cwg-rfp3-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-rfp3-bounces at icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Donna Austin
>
>
>   I have some concerns that we’re potentially over-reaching here in terms
> of what we’ve been asked to do.
>
>
>
> I don’t believe the NTIA is going to accept a proposal which calls for a
> separate IANA entity. In my mind, the NTIA announcement was evidence that
> they are happy with the current arrangement and how ICANN manages the IANA
> function – what they have asked the multi-stakeholder community to do is
> develop a mechanism that replaces the NTIA role in the process, not ICANN’s.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Donna
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
> Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
> Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3
>
>


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------





*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-rfp3/attachments/20141111/b81694f1/attachment.html>