[CWG-Stewardship] Initial Discussion Draft on Transition Models

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 11:38:10PM +0000, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> New. Contract. Therefore it would not be difficult at all for the RIRs to develop this new contract in a way that named PTI, rather than ICANN Inc., as the contractor.

That's probably true.

The IETF, however, is in a different boat, as it doesn't think it
needs such an agreement, so that is a cost of some forms of the legal
separation that are not present for other forms.  I made this argument
about some of the different hybrid-model proposals before, and it
still seems to me to be a factor worth considering.  To some extent, a
proposal has to present both low risk to transition and low risk to
the long-term goals.  Balancing this is a delicate act, I think.

Best regards,

A


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com