[CWG-Stewardship] [client com] Draft: Summary of Legal Structure for CWG Proposal

[Avri Doria]

On 19-Apr-15 13:37, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> The IANA portion of the ICANN budget *related to naming* would be
> subject to.......
>
> MM: Again, it makes no sense to keep the other parts of the IANA
> functions separate from the naming parts. The entire department must
> be legally separation.
>

As the other operational communities are clients of ICANN, is ICANN's
internal construction an issue for them?  Isn't this just an
implementation issue? Does the IETF contract/MOU specify how ICANN is
organized internally?  And as long as ICANN keeps delivering the service
they want, they won't need to resort to their remedy of finding another
provider and ICANN can be organized as it wants.

Personally, I would have preferred a solution where the other
operational communities jointly owned/controlled the affiliate, but that
idea was not treated favorably by those operational communities, so now
we have  a possible solution that leaves them with the status quo for
their relationships with ICANN.

avri


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150419/7941f634/attachment.html>