<div dir="ltr">Milton: I agree that changing the IANA operator is a technical decision and not a policy decision; however there are contingent policy issues that may arise due to this technical decision - such as jurisdiction of the new IANA operator, financing of the new IANA operator - where GAC/ALAC participation may be beneficial.<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:27 AM, Milton L Mueller <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">mueller@syr.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<div style="border-style:none none none solid;border-left-color:blue;border-left-width:1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4pt">
<div>
<div><span class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-size:12pt">In my opinion, while "day to day oversight" is technical/operational; any "major review oversight" will involve policy issues.<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">It depends on what you mean by “policy issues.” I would disagree that the choice of an IANA operator is a way
to make global policy for the DNS. What you call “major review oversight” is, I think, nothing more than the power to change the IANA functions operator.</span></p></span></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div></div></div>