[CWG-Stewardship] The PTI board

[Gomes, Chuck]

Seun,

I would strongly disagree with you that “There is seemingly no difference in structures of present model compared to contract-co in that legal still has PTI and PRF which is equivalence of Contract-co and MRT.”   Just to name a couple big differences: complexity and increased costs.

Chuck

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Seun Ojedeji
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 2:50 PM
To: Andrew Sullivan
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] The PTI board


Just to put in perspective. There is seemingly no difference in structures of present model compared to contract-co in that legal still has PTI and PRF which is equivalence of Contract-co and MRT. The major role of the 2 options is where I think the difference lies; where the legal version acts as the IANA operator(contactee), the contract-co version acts as the IANA owner (contractor)

Cheers!
sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 20 Apr 2015 19:26, "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com<mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 02:20:15PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
> through a membership model); perhaps you are thinking of the MRT role as
> you cite the dangers of "Contract Co. land."

Yep.  The proposal that I saw last year that involved Contract Co and
MRT and so on looked to me like a way of building all the structures
of ICANN all over again, only without tearing down ICANN.  I thought
then and, having reviewed it since, think now that such an approach
would not yield a stable system.

Best regards,

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com<mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150420/0d304aa2/attachment.html>