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

[Matthew Shears]

For such a number to have been developed there has to be a full analysis 
and breakdown of historical and projected future costs.

Which means the information we are seeking is available.  What is the 
process for acquiring it?

Matthew


On 2/3/2015 10:10 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> FY15 budget seems to claim total is 3.0M. Can't say wheter there are 
> other items scattered around that are attributable to IANA without the 
> label on them.
>
> Alan
>
> At 03/02/2015 04:36 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I thought it was a obvious question, but several people did not think 
>> so, and seemed to condemn the asking.  Hence I have tried to explain 
>> why I thought it important.  Seemed the least I could do.
>>
>> I think needing to know is not limited to any particular model.
>>
>> If we can't get a real figure we might be able to calculate something 
>> close using some standard reasoning:
>>
>> Full IANA employe salary budget * ICANN average burden multiplier 
>> (including all overhead costs, including senior management costs, 
>> administrative costs,  travel, benefits, office space, insurance etc)
>>
>> Companies geneally have this so they know the costs of adding each 
>> new employee - it isn't just salary.  Often this runs 100 - 200% of 
>> salary.
>>
>> Then if we figure out the FTE (full time equivalent) assigned to each 
>> of the ICG designated separable operational functions we would have a 
>> reasonable back of the envelop figure for the costs per operational 
>> community.  While it would be good to someday have the exact figures, 
>> such a calculation would at least give us general understanding.
>>
>> Having once, briefly, been the CEO of a startup, I know this is not 
>> high finance and should be trivial for someone that has all the 
>> numbers to crunch.
>>
>> As for the RIR contribution to ICANN, if we assume their approx 1 
>> million contribution is 1% of the total ICANN income (not counting 
>> new gTLD windfall and assuming a 100MUSD income), then we have an 
>> idea that their contribution to IANA is that same 1% since they are 
>> not specifically allocated funds.
>>
>> Sorry to be so pointed on this, especially since I have never gotten 
>> involved in the financial issues at ICANN before.  But it is a 
>> critical piece of the puzzle and I think we need all of the pieces.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 03-Feb-15 22:03, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>>> One can dive down and find all sorts of reasons for wanting/needing 
>>> the budget (for instance, those who oppose Contract Co want to know 
>>> by what percentage the overall budget might grow with additional 
>>> structures). But regardless of the specific rationale, it is 
>>> reasonable to assign some numbers to this if only to put the overall 
>>> operation in perspective.
>>>
>>> ICANN presents its budgets base on objective. This makes complete 
>>> sense if you want to identify what a certain objective is costing, 
>>> and one would not, for instance want to say that IT has had it's 
>>> budget double when all of the growth is related to once strategic 
>>> objective that was adopted.
>>>
>>> But our need is a different one, and if the financial system cannot 
>>> deliver what we want automatically, it should be completely 
>>> reasonable to expect someone to do the calculation by hand. We 
>>> should not have to be debating this ad infinitum.
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> At 03/02/2015 03:35 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I think  these questions ought to asked because ICANN, funded 
>>>> mostly by Names, pays for all of IANA's services.
>>>>
>>>> I think we need to know how much this costs and what the various 
>>>> portions cost as we are making assumptions about future possible 
>>>> plans.  It is part of the stability question we need to answer. 
>>>> Something I know quite well is that lack of budget results in lack 
>>>> of stability.
>>>>
>>>> The ICG has declared the three operational entities separate, and 
>>>> each of the three is declaring that they could leave ICANN if 
>>>> displeased - a position I agree with.  But this is a service that 
>>>> cost quite a bit I expect and such independence would come at a 
>>>> cost.  I think we need know the costs in order to figure out this 
>>>> puzzle. We cannot asume that thing could change without know what 
>>>> the costs would be.
>>>>
>>>> For the Names side, we know that the cost = total cost for IANA - 
>>>> costs(Numbers + Protocols).  But what is that in numbers?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> avri
>>>>
>>>> On 03-Feb-15 02:34, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ·         Why are we asking questions about numbers and 
>>>>> protocols?  If there is a good reason for that, I suggest that the 
>>>>> questions regarding numbers and protocols be separate from the 
>>>>> questions for names.
>>>>>
>>>>> ·         Regarding “*Are your concerned about the actual costs 
>>>>> for operating the IANA functions, for protocols and numbers, given 
>>>>> these are currently funded by ICANN.*” – Are don’t think it is 
>>>>> accurate to say that they are currently funded by ICANN; ICANN may 
>>>>> fund some costs but a large part of the RIR and IETF functions are 
>>>>> not funded by ICANN.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship 
>>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship> 
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship 
>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship> 
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> 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/20150204/7a60b116/attachment-0001.html>