[CWG-Stewardship] CWG - DRAFT discussion document for Singapore V3.5

[Greg Shatan]

Apologies for the loose language.  I was not really thinking of "IANA
policy" but rather "names" policy, which really only hits IANA after ICANN
implements these policies, turns them into rules and processes, and a
registry starts a process which results in the IANA staff receiving a
request.  Perhaps I was trying to draw a parallel between IETF and RIRs in
their relation to the IANA Functions Operations and ICANN (non-IANA) and
its relation to the IANA Functions Operations (performed by the IANA staff).

Greg

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:45 PM, David Conrad <david.conrad at icann.org>
wrote:

> Greg,
>
> I thought the point was that ICANN does not provide any funds *to* IETF
> and RIRs for their internal costs (such as they are) relating to IANA
> processes (which I assume is primarily policy-related).  By contrast, ICANN
> funds its own costs relating to IANA policy-making, as well as funding the
> IANA Functions Operator aspect of IANA.
>
>
> Sorry, what "IANA policy-making" are you talking about?  AFAIK, the vast
> majority of policy making is related to various gTLD-related issues, with a
> bit of ccTLD policy thrown in on occasion. There is also tiny bit of
> numbers-related policy making.  That is, the vast majority of ICANN's
> resources are spent on stuff that happens before IANA staff gets involved.
>
> Regards,
> -drc
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150203/6e9a17a3/attachment.html>