[CWG-RFP3] Seperabilty

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

While I wasn't at Frankfurt, I had gotten the impression that there had
been a strong notion of separability as one of the objects of the
contract review process.  That is, that upon review, if there was the
full possibility that that the contract could be given to another
operator.  The discussion I am seeing now gives me the impression that
perhaps this goal is weakening.  This greatly concerns me.

I think separability MUST remain a very strong actual possibility.

I see two ways this can happen:


1. Strong separability: every n (n= 2-7?) years a new RFP is released
and all comers, current contract holder included, apply for the IANA
contract and the best candidate is picked. 

2. Weak seperability: every n (n=2-7?) years a review of the current
contract holder is reviewed and the review committee has the option to
put out an RFP for the IANA contract if there are unresolved issues.

I have a preference for strong separability. 

The current NTIA contract includes both of these:

- the seven year contract cycle is strong separability
- the renewal after 4 years is weak separability.

I favor a solution that gives us the same degree of separability we
currently have under the NTIA contract going forward, and my remote
impression of the Frankfurt talks was that this is the way we are headed
though we still had details to work out.

Can anyone confirm this?

avri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-rfp3/attachments/20141124/204535c9/attachment.html>