<html>
<body>
You are presuming that the GNSO is watching, which is not it its formal
mandate, nor does it have any real mechanism which which to take action
if it did.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
At 29/10/2014 02:17 PM, Burr, Becky wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">If IANA is not implementing
policy properly, the GNSO would call the Board and staff out.
<br><br>
J. Beckwith Burr<br><br>
<b>Neustar, Inc. /</b> Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy
Officer<br><br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006<br><br>
Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 /
<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a> /
<a href="http://www.neustar.biz/" eudora="autourl">www.neustar.biz</a><br>
<br>
From: Alan Greenberg
<<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>
><br>
Date: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 at 11:00 AM<br>
To: Becky Burr
<<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a>
>, Guru Acharya
<<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>>,
Allan MacGillivray
<<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca">
allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a>><br>
Cc:
"<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">
cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>"
<<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">
cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>>, "Lindeberg, Elise"
<<a href="mailto:elise.lindeberg@npt.no">elise.lindeberg@npt.no</a>
><br>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names Community vs the
other two communities<br><br>
There is a potential problem with having just registries doing the
oversight. Particularly for gTLD,s policy is set by a MS group (the GNSO)
and it is possible that they can set a policy that the gTLD registries do
not approve of (they do not have a veto based on GNSO voting
threshholds). If IANA were to not be implementing that policy properly,
the oversight body, composed of only registries would have no incentive
to call IANA out on the problem.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
At 29/10/2014 10:33 AM, Burr, Becky wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I’d envisioned the “Oversight
Council” to be elected by registries (ccs and gs) organized in some
fashion outside of the ICANN umbrella – so the IANA Oversight Inc. or
other association we were talking about the other day. It seems to
me that the duties and authority of the Council would be determined by
the membership of the organization (I.e., the registries) – so these
questions would be resolved as part of structuring Oversight, Inc.
Let’s not create yet another separate mechanism. Instead, figure
out a way for the views of all stakeholders with respect to major
decisions can be collected by Oversight, Inc. and taken into account in
the process of developing major proposals. <br><br>
<br>
J. Beckwith Burr<br><br>
<b>Neustar, Inc. /</b> Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy
Officer<br><br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006<br><br>
Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 /
<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a> /
<a href="http://www.neustar.biz/" eudora="autourl">www.neustar.biz</a><br>
<br>
From: Guru Acharya
<<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>><br>
Date: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 at 9:35 AM<br>
To: Allan MacGillivray <<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca">
allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a>><br>
Cc: Becky Burr
<<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a>
>, "<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">
cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>"
<<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">
cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>>, "Lindeberg, Elise"
<<a href="mailto:elise.lindeberg@npt.no">elise.lindeberg@npt.no</a>
><br>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names Community vs the
other two communities<br><br>
Postulates emerging from Allan's remarks:<br><br>
The Oversight Council will monitor compliance with day to day technical
SLA type requirements.<br><br>
Even though the final contracting authority of changing the IANA operator
will rest with the Oversight Council:<br><br>
1) There will be a "separate mechanism" for recommending any
major decision to the Oversight Council, including change of IANA
operator<br><br>
2) The Oversight Council will be bound to accept/implement the decision
of the "separate mechanism". <br><br>
3) That "separate mechanism" will necessarily involve the views
of the GAC.<br><br>
4) That "separate mechanism" will be at an arms length from
ICANN so that the ICANN board can not interfere since ICANN is the
present IANA operator.<br><br>
How do we intend to codify these characteristics of the "separate
mechanism" so that the GAC can be assured that they will be
consulted in case of change of the IANA operator? Maybe as part of a MOU
between the Oversight Council and GAC+ALAC+GNSO+CCSNO?<br><br>
<br><br>
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Allan MacGillivray
<<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca">
allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a>> wrote:
<dl>
<dd>I see the “oversight council” as being a body that deals with IANA
compliance with day-to-day SLA-type responsibilities e.g. the current
performance metric that 80% of root zone file and WHOIS database change
requests be completed within 21 days. I would not expect that
governments (other than those that are ccTLD operators) would have much
interest in this. However, were there to be major review of these
functions, such as that which the NTIA initiated in 2011 with its NOI, or
to change the operator, then I would expect that the responsibility for
conducting such a review would not fall on the ‘oversight council’ alone
and that in whatever mechanism that would be established, there could be
a role for governments.<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>From:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">
cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a> [
<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" eudora="autourl">
mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Guru Acharya
<dd>Sent: October-29-14 8:32 AM
<dd>To: Becky Burr
<dd>Cc:
<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>;
Lindeberg, Elise
<dd>Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names Community vs
the other two communities<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>Becky. I agree with your initial assessment that the "oversight
council" would focus on "technical and operational issues"
(as opposed to policy issues); and therefore GAC participation in the
council will not be required even though GAC participation at an equal
footing will not be inconsistent with the multi-stakeholder model. <br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>However, I think GAC participation in the council might be essential
in the scenario where the oversight council decides to change the IANA
operator in the future. If the council decides to contract a different
operator (different from ICANN) in the future, would it not lead to
various policy issues such as jurisdiction of the new IANA operator,
financing of the new IANA operator etc - where the insight of the GAC may
be beneficial?<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>Therefore I think GAC should be a part of the oversight council.<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>Regards,<br>
<dd>Guru<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Burr, Becky
<<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>
> wrote:<br>
<dd>Thanks Elise, very helpful. I was thinking that the “oversight
counsel” would focus on technical and operational issues as opposed to
policy issues ... But policy for IANA would remain in existing ICANN
processes. Could you help me understand which technical/operational
IANA services might raise “public interest” concerns? I agree with
you that having some GAC reps on a Oversight Counsel would not be
inconsistent with the Strickling view, but I am curious about why GAC
might want to participate in that kind of counsel. <br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
</dl><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a>
<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a></blockquote>
</blockquote></body>
</html>