[CWG-Stewardship] Update on the Integrated model.

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hi John,

While this is not the place to discuss RIR and IETF engagement process.
Perhaps it's useful to note that the RIR process of developing it's
proposal was done in an open manner; open for any member of the global
community to contribute. Same can also be said about the IETF but I can
speak more confidently about the RIR since I was more involved in that
process.

I also believe that ICG would run public comments period after compiling
the first single transition proposal which will give opportunity for anyone
interested to further comment. So I don't think any unilateral decision
was/has been made so far in this process.

Cheers!

sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 23 Feb 2015 22:23, "John Poole" <jp1 at expri.com> wrote:

> James: Under the external Trust model, ICANN is replaceable, but only by
> Trustees, representative of, and acting on behalf of the entire global
> multistakeholder community, but only then under very limited circumstances
> in accordance with the terms of the Trust instrument (and even then subject
> to judicial review). But you have made my previous point exactly--I do not
> buy the argument that IETF or RIRs somehow should be elevated above others
> in the global multistakeholder community, or should be empowered alone to
> make that decision unilaterally. The IANA functions belong to the entire
> global multistakeholder community, not just IETF or RIRs.
> Best regards,
> John Poole
>
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 2:22 PM, James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
> wrote:
>
>>  Perhaps I am showing my ignorance of a nuance here but I would have
>> thought it was the other way around, ICANN is replaceable, the IETF and
>> RIRs will walk away and select a new IANA functions operator outside of
>> ICANN if necessary, or at least that has been my understanding and reading
>> of their ICG submissions?
>>
>>  Very open to correction by more educated people than myself here!
>>
>>  On 23 Feb 2015, at 19:53, John Poole <jp1 at expri.com> wrote:
>>
>> If IETF or RIRs or anyone else--governments included--choose not to
>> participate in IANA or ICANN, let them walk--no one is irreplaceable.
>> ICANN, the IANA functions operator, should never be subject to extortionate
>> demands from any source.
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150223/12bb533c/attachment.html>