[CWG-Stewardship] Financing the new IANA

Sat Oct 25 13:51:29 UTC 2014

On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org> wrote:

> Hi Seun,
>
> I can’t claim particular expertise, but nonetheless, some thoughts in-line
> to your questions:
>
> On Oct 25, 2014, at 1:09 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hmm... just to further understand the practicality of this. So the new
> IANA (names part of the functions) will be funded by the registries right.
> Well i have a few set of questions below:
>
> - How does/will something like newgTLD process look like? I.e will ICANN
> accredit or the new entity?
>
> Doesn’t ICANN already do this?
>

Yes it does and i am not talking about the present, i am talking about the
future without the NTIA. All my questions are some practicalities i think
we need to clarify from if there is indeed going to be a new IANA, In
respect to the role of ICANN vis the new IANA (names function)

>
> - What exactly will the new entity be doing?
>
> The way I see it, the new entity will not be a new IANA, but a replacement
> for the current IANA steward (i.e.: the NTIA). Creating a new steward does
> not necessarily require the creation of a new IANA. What it will be doing
> is what we need to collectively figure out and propose to the ICG, but that
> would surely include awarding the IANA contract to a contractor, making it
> the principle in that agreement.
>

Okay if its not going to be the new IANA then i think i will pause my
comments right here and ask Roberto to clarify what he meant by new IANA
funding? My interpretation was that he was referring to the names IANA
functions taken out from ICANN and not necessarily the ability to award
contract as you have indicated above.

If its the contracting (which is not necessarily what the IGP proposes),
Then we need to face some realities:

- I am not a lawyer but i don't see how a consortium of any SO/AC within
ICANN can award a contract.
- A contracting body as it stands will most likely need to have some
governmental involvement in one way or the other (!=NTIA requirement)
- There may then be other issue of who oversights on the new contracting
body
- The ultimate puzzle will we be asking what we will be solving by moving
from a contracting regime to another one that is yet to be in formation

Just a few cents and i am sure there are other perspectives

Cheers!

Regards

> - What will ICANN's new role be? I am assuming PDP (based on IGP) if that
> is the case it means the new entity will work on the ICANN's community
> developed policy right? And how does that improve accountability.
>
> Policy development for gTLDs is not a new role for ICANN. It’s what its
> current role is, and will continue to be. The accountability of ICANN’s PDP
> for gTLDs and the accountability of ICANN’s management of the IANA function
> are two different things. I am not assuming that IANA needs to be separated
> from ICANN as a result of the process we are currently in. It should,
> however, be a possibility in the event that ICANN attempts to abuse its
> management of IANA, which constitutes the accountability issues we need to
> discuss. This will also largely depend on the broader ICANN accountability
> issues, which will be discussed in another CWG.
>
> - Who determine what staff to employ for the new entity? I presume there
> will then be a need for board of Directors, bylaw, membership etc.
>
> If by “new entity”, you mean the new stewardship/oversight body/council/or
> DROC, then that new entity should probably decide what it requires in terms
> of staff support. I don’t foresee a need for a board of directors, but I
> may be wrong in case a BoDs is required in the event incorporation is.
> Membership and who develops the bylaws should probably be proposed by us
> (this CWG).
>
> If by “new entity”, you mean the new IANA, I would assume that whoever is
> the contractor will make these decisions, wether the contractor is ICANN or
> any other org.
>
> - Is the new entity going to be established in any country?
>
> Wouldn’t it have to be?
>
> - What will the composition of such new entities board look like? cctld,
> gtld, end-users?
>
> Is this the same question as the one above?
>
> - Who will generally oversee the accountability of the new entity?
>
> I would hope that the accountability of the new entity is overseen by the
> communities that appoint representatives to its decision-making body. I
> suspect that both cc and gTLD registries will play an important, although
> not exclusive, role in this.
>
> - Who/what determines how the funds is shared between ICANN and the new
> entity?
>
> I believe that finances shouldn’t be shared, but divided. It makes the
> possibility of separability (in the event that it is required) more
> straight forward. The new stewardship org could get its funding from fees
> collected from registries similar to the registry-level transaction fees
> collected by ICANN based on its own budget requirements. These fees could
> also be deducted from the same fees ICANN currently collects from
> registries, resulting in little to no increase of levies on them. I believe
> ICANN’s draft budget for FY15 placed the total amount required for the
> delivery of the IANA functions at about USD 9.5 million.
>
> My two cents on these, but suspect there are aspects I haven’t considered.
> More thoughts would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>
>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141025/826368ac/attachment-0001.html>