[CWG-Stewardship] ICANN Board as "regulator"

[Avri Doria]

hi,

I think you are pretty much right about it being unsolved.
Every time we get close to those issue we shy away from them.

We have talked a little about using a certified auditor firm to
duplicate the task.
We have talked about not needing anyone to do that task.
And a few opinion points in between.
At one point we had a suggestion that the/a staffer of Contract Co could
do it it, but it was at that point that we realized that Contract  Co
was growing in functionality

Perhaps it deserves a design team of its own.

avri

On 22-Feb-15 15:05, David Conrad wrote:
> Milton,
>
>>> I'm curious: where are the IANA operational issues associated with the
>>> transition supposed to be discussed in your view?
>> Here and in the ICG. Not sure I understand why that isn't evident to you.
> Because, to date and to my knowledge, no one has actually discussed IANA
> operational issues -- from my undoubtedly naïve perspective, the CWG
> appears to have been solely focused on duplicating the effort of the CCWG.
> Admittedly, I haven't been following too closely, but last I looked, even
> the most obvious and critical aspect, namely the fact that NTIA is in the
> direct operational loop for ALL root zone changes was termed an "orphan
> issue"(!).
>
> Can you point me to where the CWG (or the ICG) have been discussing IANA
> operational issues?  I'd like to get caught up.
>
> Thanks,
> -drc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150222/e8a909f8/attachment-0001.html>