<p dir="ltr">Hi Malcolm,</p>
<p dir="ltr">I don't think the goal of this cwg should be to replicate the NTIA contract also I don't think this cwg has already concluded it's going the "creating an oversight body" route.<br>
The defacto PDP homes for the different functions (numbers, names and protocol) are known and is not a point of discussion within this cwg.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Maybe it will do us all some good to avoid some "what ifs" like this one relating to policy authority ;)</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards</p>
<p dir="ltr">sent from Google nexus 4<br>
kindly excuse brevity and typos.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 19 Nov 2014 08:09, "Malcolm Hutty" <<a href="mailto:malcolm@linx.net">malcolm@linx.net</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
On 19/11/2014 00:56, Burr, Becky wrote:<br>
> The IANA Functions contract between the DOC and ICANN is going away.<br>
> ICANN has two work streams as a result:<br>
><br>
> 1) The IANA Functions transition track to decide what needs to be put in<br>
> place to ensure that the IANA functions continue to be performed in a<br>
> responsible manner.<br>
<br>
[snip]<br>
<br>
> 2) The Accountability track to decide what needs to be put in place as a<br>
> substitute for the general ³stewardship² authority that the DOC retained<br>
> as a result of the IANA Functions Contract. That is just a fancy way of<br>
> saying that the power to take away the IANA functions contract gave the<br>
> DOC some ability to influence ICANN work beyond the IANA functions.<br>
> Issues related to the ³Policy² authority, IMHO, belongs in this track.<br>
<br>
Becky,<br>
<br>
That's not my understanding.<br>
<br>
I think the two things go on are:<br>
<br>
1. The preparation of a transition proposal for the end of the NTIA<br>
role. The overall co-ordination of that lies in the hands of the ICG,<br>
but the ICG is not developing the proposal. For that task there are<br>
three separate tracks, and this CWG is charged with the DNS track.<br>
This CWG, as I understand it, reports out to the ICG, which ultimately<br>
reports out the community consensus proposal to NTIA. This therefore<br>
lies somewhat "outside" ICANN.<br>
<br>
2. A separate "Accountability" discussion happening within the ICANN<br>
community. That group is intended to discuss a much broader range of<br>
issues than those intended for the transition report. The group may or<br>
may not report before the transition proposal is sent to NTIA, and<br>
appears unlikely to have a draft report before this CWG has committed to<br>
produce its draft proposals for community review. When it does report,<br>
it does so as part of the ICANN community, and so is ultimately<br>
reporting to the ICANN Board, not to NTIA.<br>
<br>
Accordingly, this CWG is the place to raise issues that it is suggested<br>
ought to be addressed within the community transition proposal for which<br>
the NTIA has asked. The existence of a separate process within ICANN<br>
shouldn't be taken to restrict what can be proposed for as content for<br>
the transition proposal, and so shouldn't restrict the scope of<br>
discussion within this discussion group. This group *should* however be<br>
restricted to discuss only matters under consideration for the<br>
transition proposal, which excludes a great swathe of what the<br>
"Accountability" CWG intends to consider.<br>
<br>
Kind Regards,<br>
<br>
Malcolm.<br>
<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> J. Beckwith Burr<br>
> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer<br>
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006<br>
> Office: <a href="tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932">+ 1.202.533.2932</a> Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367">+1.202.352.6367</a> /<br>
> <a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a> / <a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">www.neustar.biz</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On 11/18/14, 3:51 PM, "Malcolm Hutty" <<a href="mailto:malcolm@linx.net">malcolm@linx.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> On 18/11/2014 20:30, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<br>
>>> Guru/Malcolm,<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Please show me where in the CWG charter we are tasked with doing<br>
>>> anything with regard to the Policy Authority.<br>
>><br>
>> Chuck,<br>
>><br>
>> In broad terms, my answer to your question is contained in the reply I<br>
>> have just sent to Alan's e-mail.<br>
>><br>
>> In narrower terms, I contend that the task the community has been set by<br>
>> NTIA is to produce an acceptable and adequate proposal for how the<br>
>> community will take on the stewardship role when the NTIA steps back.<br>
>><br>
>> This CWG exists to coordinate that part of the draft transition proposal<br>
>> that relates to the NTIA's historic role in respect of the DNS.<br>
>><br>
>> The controlling tasking here comes from the NTIA transition<br>
>> announcement; anything else is subsidary. If the CWG charter is<br>
>> narrower, and prevents us producing an adequate and acceptable response<br>
>> to the NTIA challenge to the community, then the charter is wrong and<br>
>> should be changed.<br>
>><br>
>> Let me reiterate that I am not arguing that we should be discussing<br>
>> whether to transfer gTLD policy authority away from ICANN. I don't<br>
>> believe that should happen. However I do believe that it is within scope<br>
>> to ask what fundamental requirements should be laid upon ICANN as a<br>
>> condition of it holding such policy authority, and it is within scope to<br>
>> consider how those requirements should be enforced when the NTIA is no<br>
>> longer available to do so.<br>
>><br>
>> Malcolm.<br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> Malcolm Hutty | tel: <a href="tel:%2B44%2020%207645%203523" value="+442076453523">+44 20 7645 3523</a><br>
>> Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog<br>
>> London Internet Exchange |<br>
>> <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__publicaffairs.linx.net" target="_blank">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__publicaffairs.linx.net</a><br>
>> _&d=AAICAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8W<br>
>> DDkMr4k&m=23IAiywGVv-I1PPpgNMBs1LpeMSolABZQIWWdPp3pYI&s=phwP8L1GOJKMK6j6yh<br>
>> MF7ULGaxw-nVDJfWZcmJZzEFY&e=<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">Cwg-rfp3@icann.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_" target="_blank">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_</a><br>
>> listinfo_cwg-2Drfp3&d=AAICAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq<br>
>> 8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=23IAiywGVv-I1PPpgNMBs1LpeMSolABZQIWWdPp3pYI&s=<br>
>> ci-kEhQZSI8veKTm1jkSUJZmQrDzYw_bdKQwnD2QIA4&e=<br>
><br>
<br>
--<br>
Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523<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">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>