<div dir="ltr">I do not understand the hard distinction that you make between "policy source" and "policy authority". If NTIA were to change the "policy source" from ICANN PDD to IWONT PDP in C.2.9.2.d, will it not render the ICANN PDP pointless and the IWONT PDP authoritative? Effectively does that not change the Policy Authority from ICANN to IWONT?<div><br></div><div>Isn't that also the reason why the 500 page ICANN response to the NTIA RFP, which is incorporated into the IANA Functions Contract by reference, outlines in detail the PDP that ICANN intends to follow?</div><div><br></div><div>In any case, if the CWG chooses to develop a proposal in which it grants the ICANN PDP perpetual authority as the policy source, <b>then it should be clearly stated in the proposal</b>. This is so that this issue does not escape the global community's notice when it is put up for comments; and so that the global community can comment in favour of it or against it in an informed manner.</div><div><br></div><div>If the CWG chooses to allow the Oversight Body to change the Policy Authority by way of amending the said clause, then the implications of it, in terms of transition of the policy authority, conflict of interest etc need to be discussed in further detail and outlined in the proposal.</div><div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Seun Ojedeji <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="">On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Guru Acharya <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Currently NTIA, if it so desires, can take the Policy Authority away from ICANN to another organisation by amending <span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">C.2.9.2.d</span>. </div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Well NTIA by that contract can at moment decide to ask IANA operator to refer to any policy source. Same statement as above is also indicated for numbers (ref C.2.9.3). However this does not mean that the contract gave ICANN the authority to run the names PDP neither did it give the authority to the numbers community to run numbers PDP.<br></div><span class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div>NTIA effectively has stewardship over the IANA Functions Operator and the Policy Authority. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>I will agree with the former but not the later. The NTIA recognises the policy sources and have instructed the operator to operate based on those policy sources.<br> <br></div><span class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Unfortunately, the entire debate has been framed as limited to IANA Stewardship to the exclusion of the Policy Authority Stewardship. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>And this IMO is correct, NTIA does not control the policy authority but only controls the IANA functions operations and so we should indeed focus on the IANA functions stewardship authority <br></div><span class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div>The question then becomes whether in the event of the stewardship transition, should this power of changing the Policy Authority be retained by the Oversight Body that is replacing NTIA?</div><div><br></div></div></blockquote></span><div>If this is referring to the policy source (not authority) then it can be considered.<br><br></div><span class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div>Or should the Policy Authority be perpetually granted to ICANN? </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>The current PDP for names is happening at ICANN so ICANN (its entire community) already has that authority.<br><br></div><div>Cheers!<br></div><div><div class="h5"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Seun Ojedeji <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Guru Acharya <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Excellent point Malcolm. <span><div><br></div><div>However, I agree that the Policy Authority should not be immutable or perpetually granted to ICANN.</div></span></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Honestly Guru i am not sure i understand the point above. Are you saying that the approval of policies related to names should not be done by ICANN board OR you are saying there should be another independent oversight for policy?<br><br></div><div>Thanks<br><br></div><div>Regards!<br></div><div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Guru</div></div><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Malcolm Hutty <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:malcolm@linx.net" target="_blank">malcolm@linx.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear all,<br>
<br>
I hope I have not come too late to this party to participate. I have<br>
carefully read the mail archive before posting.<br>
<br>
Before I dive in with my suggestions, I have a question regarding<br>
Strawman 2 and Strawman 3. Both these strawmen envisage that the IANA<br>
Functions Contract would continue, with two different types of new<br>
entity as the counter-party to replace NTIA, "PROC" and "PROSI". Both<br>
these strawmen entertain the the possibility that someone other than<br>
ICANN could be awarded the IANA Functions Contract.<br>
<br>
My question is this: in the event that the new counter-party (PROC or<br>
PROSI) placed the IANA Functions Countract with a new operator, would it<br>
be open to the counter-party to direct the IANA operator to a new source<br>
of policy authority for gTLDs?<br>
<br>
The existing policy authority of ICANN derives from paragraph C.2.9.2.d<br>
of the IANA Function Contract, which states:<br>
<br>
* C.2.9.2d Delegation and Redelegation of a Generic Top Level<br>
* Domain (gTLD) -- The Contractor shall verify that all requests<br>
* related to the delegation and redelegation of gTLDs are consistent<br>
* with the procedures developed by ICANN. In making a delegation or<br>
* redelegation recommendation, the Contractor must provide<br>
* documentation verifying that ICANN followed its own policy framework<br>
* including specific documentation demonstrating how the process<br>
* provided the opportunity for input from relevant stakeholders and was<br>
* supportive of the global public interest. The Contractor shall submit<br>
* its recommendations to the COR via a Delegation and Redelegation<br>
* Report.<br>
<br>
This paragraph appears to be of core importance. As I understand matter,<br>
it is this paragraph which gives ICANN policy authority over gTLDs as a<br>
practical matter: subjective claims about community support may explain<br>
why the NTIA chose to grant ICANN this authority, but that community<br>
will was only given effect through this paragraph.<br>
<br>
So my first question is, do the current strawmen (2 & 3) intend that<br>
this provision be a fixed and wholly immutable provision of any future<br>
IANA Functions Contract, or could ICANN be replaced by the counter-party<br>
(either at-will or in defined circumstances)?<br>
<br>
I would like to point out that this is not explicitly clear from the<br>
strawmen as drafted, and that is a weakness that should be addressed.<br>
My sense is that you intend it to be immutable, and I do consider that<br>
problematic, but before diving into why I would like to confirm your<br>
intentions (and discover whether there is an existing consensus on this<br>
point).<br>
<br>
<br>
Malcolm.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Malcolm Hutty | tel: <a href="tel:%2B44%2020%207645%203523" value="+442076453523" target="_blank">+44 20 7645 3523</a><br>
Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog<br>
London Internet Exchange | <a href="http://publicaffairs.linx.net/" target="_blank">http://publicaffairs.linx.net/</a><br>
<br>
London Internet Exchange Ltd<br>
21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY<br>
<br>
Company Registered in England No. 3137929<br>
Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Cwg-rfp3 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cwg-rfp3@icann.org" target="_blank">Cwg-rfp3@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Cwg-rfp3 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cwg-rfp3@icann.org" target="_blank">Cwg-rfp3@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div></div><span><font color="#888888"><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div><div dir="ltr">------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><font color="#888888"><blockquote style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex;font-family:garamond,serif">
<i><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Seun Ojedeji,<br style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Federal University Oye-Ekiti<br style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">web: </span><a href="http://www.fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">http://www.fuoye.edu.ng</a><br>
<span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Mobile: <a value="+2348035233535">+2348035233535</a></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><br></i><i><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">alt email:<a href="http://goog_1872880453" target="_blank"> </a><a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng</a></span></i><br><br><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The key to understanding is humility - my view !<br></blockquote></blockquote></font><br></div></div>
</font></span></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div></div></div><div><div class="h5"><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div><div dir="ltr">------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><font color="#888888"><blockquote style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex;font-family:garamond,serif">
<i><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Seun Ojedeji,<br style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Federal University Oye-Ekiti<br style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">web: </span><a href="http://www.fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">http://www.fuoye.edu.ng</a><br>
<span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Mobile: <a value="+2348035233535">+2348035233535</a></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><br></i><i><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">alt email:<a href="http://goog_1872880453" target="_blank"> </a><a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng</a></span></i><br><br><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The key to understanding is humility - my view !<br></blockquote></blockquote></font><br></div></div>
</div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>