[CWG-Stewardship] Concern with Contract Co.

[Milton L Mueller]

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> I do not recall having a real stab at the alternatives. The "Trust"
> model was never given a chance to be discussed. Neither was the option of
> keeping the contracting function within ICANN with internal mechanisms that
> might create a linked entity like the ASO/NRO using MoUs. A lot of ICANN's

I can tell you that this alternative (keeping the contracting function within ICANN) is non-negotiably unacceptable to a pretty large segment of this group. It simply doesn't comport with our accountability concerns or the seperability principle. I think those options were indeed considered and rejected, not just in Frankfurt, but well before that.  

> model is based on these MoUs. Or a model based on SLA, processes and
> obligations which automatically trigger remedial processes overseen by a
> neutral organisation has not been discussed either.

It seems like you'd like to start from scratch, Olivier. I am sure lots of us would like to go back to our own smaller groups and redesign the thing all over in a way that we like. I don't think that is wise and I don't think we have time for it. 

At this stage of the game, if you want to alter the model, you need to make specific arguments for or against specific structures. The idea that we can just randomly consider a bunch of unspecified alternatives because people were controlled by "groupthink" is not very constructive