[CWG-Stewardship] Clarification on PTI scope

[Christopher Wilkinson]

Good catch, Seun.

There is no doubt in my mind that PTI was defined as the successor to all the IANA functions.

Regards

CW




On 23 Apr 2016, at 21:27, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> From my understanding of PTI was that it's going to be the new IANA that will serve the 3OCs (even though numbers and protocols contracts with ICANN).
> 
> If my high-level understanding above is right, then i think there may be something wrong in the fy17 draft budget which has just been brought to my attention.
> 
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-fy17-05mar16-en.pdf
> 
> Page 25 item 4 says the following:
> 
> PTI- New legal entity, destined to host activities and costs of the IANA functions in service of 
> the *Names community*
> 
> Then page 27 seem to imply that PTI will indeed serve the names alone. At the moment, I have not considered the application of this new arrangement and unless I am missing something, I don't think this was what was proposed.
> 
> Regards
> Sent from my LG G4
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160423/e2a866bc/attachment.html>