[CWG-Stewardship] Comments on principles

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I see at least 1 other category and another entry for the Accountabilty
category


the new Category is Separability.

In order to reproduce the NTIA contract, it has to be possible for the
Naming policy groups of ICANN to become dissatisfied and move the
contract for the function elsewhere.  This is the correlate of the IETF
capability.  Other principles such as stabilty  mean this can't just
happen willy nilly, but there must be some sort of periodic opportunity
this to happen.  Or perhaps a 6 month clause like the IETF has.  while
there are several ways to do this, I think it critical that the plan
include the possiblity and the means.

And the new bullets in accountability

- There needs to be a mechanism for an enforceable means of redress. 
Whether it is achieved by binding arbitration, some sort of juridical
system or a yet to be named capability, it has to be possible for there
to be an accessible and relaible mean of redress.

- We need to decide to whom it is accountable.  The stakeholders?  The
policy process? the registries? the registrants? the users? 
Accountabilty must be accountabilty to someone.  I beleive it is the
stakeholders, but that probably needs to be further defined.  Do we mean
the multiplicity of stakeholder groups ICANN has?  Or do we mean to a
Tunis Agenda model of stakeholders?  Some other model?


The answers to the principle questions will say a lot about the kind of
solution we might come up with.

thanks

avri



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141022/d0b0994f/attachment-0001.html>