<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>Dear All,<br><br></div>Just to reiterate again that in my personal view; RFP and duration of contract is a feature that can be determined/decided at any point in time in this transition process. The details of the contracting body is what needs to be first determined before RFP or contract duration is integrated with it. The nature and composition of the contracting entity will ultimately help understand what to expect in future which will help decide on the other elements including whether their is need for RFP or duration of contract.<br><br></div>We need to remember that this is no longer going to be a body with NTIA characteristics which is immune to a lot of external forces/attacks....so looking to have features similar to NTIA processes when the actor does not have the characteristics of NTIA seem to me like creating a new fish bone that will get stuck in our throat.<br><br></div>Regards<br><div><div><br><br><br></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 8:29 PM, 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">There was some very sound reasoning in the Frankfurt discussions against an RFP being issued in September 2015. Such reasoning said that in case a new IANA operator is selected as a result of the RFP in Sept 2015, both the oversight body and the IANA operator would be completely new at the same time, which could possibly lead to operational instability. I tend to agree with such logic.<div><br></div><div>In order to deal with this transition, maybe we can suggest that the new contracting entity have the initial contract with ICANN as the IANA operator for the first two years without an RFP. In this two year period, the periodic review team would have sufficient time to establish itself and smoothen the procedural details. After this two year period, the periodic review team should initiate a RFP based on a periodic cycle, with the option of one extension (3+2) at the discretion of the periodic review team. After this 5 year period, the periodic review team must initiate a mandatory RFP. </div><div><br></div><div>This 5 year period seems like a safe investment cycle from the experience that Mathieu shares. If a case for larger investment cycles is made, we could consider the option of two extensions (3+2+2=7).</div><div><br></div><div>I hope something similar can be agreed upon and we move towards a compromise.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5">On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Avri Doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033"><span>
<br>
<div>On 25-Nov-14 14:42, Guru Acharya wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>1) That there is no need for an RFP in September 2015 when the current
contract term ends.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
Note, I also do not think that there is the need for an RFP in
2015. <br>
I do not think that would contribute to stability or quality of
performance.<span><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>2) That there is no need for an RFP that is periodic.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
While I do believe there is a need to a periodic one. <br>
I think the first can be 3-9 years hence. <br>
9 seems long, 3 might be short.<br>
6 might be in compromise range.<span><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
avri<br>
</font></span></div>
<br></div></div><span class="">_______________________________________________<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></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
<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>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><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>