[CWG-Stewardship] Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] Ominous update on the IANA transition

Fri May 1 17:16:59 UTC 2015

Seun,

Your disagreement with my approach is noted.

Greg

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
> Considering this is an IETF related issue, i think your request would be
> better asked from the IETF community(IANAPLAN), or better still, it will be
> good to ask the IETF leadership to grant permission to release such
> information.
> I am saying this because similar question has been asked on the IETF list.
>
> Regards
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Theresa,
>>
>> Thank you for the response.  For the time challenged among us (which is
>> probably all of us), can you please identify which sections of the existing
>> contract are involved?  I'm not asking for the legal analysis, on the
>> assumption that would be privileged (though it would be preferable to share
>> it with the community, in my opinion) -- just the sections.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Theresa Swinehart <
>> theresa.swinehart at icann.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the statement, and agree it's an important piece to read.
>>> To
>>> add to this, we are raising concerns because suggested new text to the
>>> language raise a legal issue for us under the existing contract ICANN has
>>> with NTIA. This is hopefully temporary as the NTIA contract eventually
>>> expires. In fact, this case is an excellent example of a reason why the
>>> transition is so essential. We have no desire to affect the results of
>>> the
>>> community processes. We also believe that it would be more appropriate to
>>> maintain the status quo until the conclusion of the transition process to
>>> not pre-empt or create a perception of pre-empting any of the community
>>> consensus process around any areas in the finalization of the transition.
>>>
>>> Theresa
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/30/15 3:51 PM, "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Hi,
>>> >
>>> >I encourage those who are interested in this go and read the message
>>> >exactly as it was posted, and not a summary from someone else.  The
>>> >message is at
>>> >http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01680.html.
>>> >It's not long.  I encourage people to read it carefully, because it
>>> >was written that way.  I shall not say more than I said in that
>>> >message, however.
>>> >
>>> >Best regards,
>>> >
>>> >A
>>> >
>>> >On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:29:30AM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>> >> I am forwarding the email below, as it will be of interest to this
>>> >>group as
>>> >> well.  It would also be of interest to hear the views of those who are
>>> >> involved in the process (to the extent that is possible given ongoing
>>> >> negotiations).
>>> >>
>>> >> Greg
>>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> >> From: Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net>
>>> >> Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:14 AM
>>> >> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Ominous update on the IANA transition
>>> >> To: Accountability Cross Community
>>> >><accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> I think this post on the NCSG list by Dr. Mueller might be of interest
>>> >>to
>>> >> those of us working on Accountability.
>>> >>
>>> >> Best,
>>> >>
>>> >> Ed Morris
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> >> From: Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
>>> >> Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:27 PM
>>> >> Subject: Ominous update on the IANA transition
>>> >> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear NCSG:
>>> >>
>>> >> It¹s now official: ICANN doesn¹t even want to let the IETF have a
>>> >>choice of
>>> >> its IANA functions operator.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Those of you who read my blog post on ICANN¹s interactions with the
>>> >>numbers
>>> >> community
>>> >>
>>> >><
>>> http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/04/28/icann-wants-an-iana-functio
>>> >>ns-monopoly-and-its-willing-to-wreck-the-transition-process-to-get-it/>
>>> >> will already know that ICANN is refusing to accept the consensus of
>>> the
>>> >> numbers community by recognizing its contractual right to terminate
>>> its
>>> >> IANA functions operator agreement with ICANN. In that blog, I referred
>>> >>to
>>> >> second-hand reports that IETF was encountering similar problems with
>>> >>ICANN.
>>> >> Those reports are now public; the chairs of the IETF, IAB and IETF
>>> >> Administrative Oversight Committee have sent a letter to their
>>> community
>>> >> <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01680.html>
>>> >> noting that ICANN is refusing to renew their supplemental service
>>> level
>>> >> agreement because it includes new provisions designed to facilitate
>>> >>change
>>> >> in IANA functions operators should IETF become dissatisfied with
>>> ICANN.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> These are truly shocking moves, because in effect ICANN¹s legal staff
>>> is
>>> >> telling both the numbers and the protocols communities that they will
>>> >>not
>>> >> accept the proposals for the IANA transition that they have developed
>>> as
>>> >> part of the IANA Stewardship Coordination Group (ICG) process. In both
>>> >> cases, the proposals were consensus proposals within the affected
>>> >> communities, and were approved by the ICG as complete and conformant
>>> to
>>> >>the
>>> >> NTIA criteria. Thus, ICANN is in effect usurping the entire process,
>>> >> setting itself (rather than ICG and NTIA) as the arbiter of what is an
>>> >> acceptable transition proposal.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> The key point of conflict here seems to be the issue of whether ICANN
>>> >>will
>>> >> have a permanent monopoly on the provision of IANA functions, or
>>> whether
>>> >> each of the affected communities  names, numbers and protocols  will
>>> >>have
>>> >> the right to choose the operator of their global registries.
>>> >>Separability
>>> >> is explicitly recognized by the Cross community working group on Names
>>> >>as a
>>> >> principle to guide the transition, and was also listed as a
>>> requirement
>>> >>by
>>> >> the CRISP team. And the IETF has had an agreement with ICANN giving
>>> them
>>> >> separability since 2000 (RFC 2860
>>> >><https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2860>).
>>> >> Yet despite the wishes of the community, ICANN seems to insist on a
>>> >> monopoly and seems to be exploiting the transition process to get one.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Of course, a severable contract for the IANA functions is the most
>>> >> effective and important form of accountability. If the users of IANA
>>> are
>>> >> locked in to a single provider, it is more difficult to keep the IANA
>>> >> responsive, efficient and accountable. Given the implications of these
>>> >> actions for the accountability CCWG, I hope someone on that list will
>>> >> forward this message to their list, if someone has not noted this
>>> event
>>> >> already.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Milton L Mueller
>>> >>
>>> >> Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
>>> >>
>>> >> Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>>> >>
>>> >> http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
>>> >>
>>> >> Internet Governance Project
>>> >>
>>> >> http://internetgovernance.org
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> >> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>> >
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>> >> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >--
>>> >Andrew Sullivan
>>> >ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>>> >_______________________________________________
>>> >CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>> >CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>> >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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:
> http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt
> email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
> <seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
>
> The key to understanding is humility - my view !
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150501/3db68c1e/attachment.html>