<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
Hi,<br>
<br>
I understand, but am of the view that if we can't even see the full
separate budget when the current contract requires a degree of
functional separation, it is difficult to move forward with this
transition in any sort of knowledgeable way. <br>
<br>
I just do not understand how can we pick or trust any of these
models if a separate budget cannot be shown. Yes we have been
hearing about the future detail in the budgets, but if after all
these years we cannot get that despite a very competent budget and
accounting department at ICANN, one must assume some degree of
unwillingness at ICANN on budget transparency.<br>
<br>
From the ATRT2 report:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">ICANN’s (yearly) financial reporting shall
ensure that it is possible to track<br>
ICANN’s activities and the related expenses with particular focus
on the<br>
implementation of the (yearly) budget.</blockquote>
<br>
The fact that we cannot know the full budget for IANA is a problem.
And it is a problem we must solve becasue the CCWG plans for budget
accountabilty are long range, and this is a immediate problem for
getting our work done.<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03-Feb-15 16:04, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6DCFB66DEEF3CF4D98FA55BCC43F152E494F2BE5@BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
medium)">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>I definitely think we should
eventually be able to see a breakdown of IANA costs by
naming, numbers and protocols. I say eventually because,
based on my involvement in the ICANN budget, I don’t think
ICANN’s AtTask system is implemented to support that yet.
Those of us who have been involved in budget issues have
been asking for more budget detail for many years and I am
cautiously optimistic that it will eventually possible.
That said, I strongly support asking for it.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>The point I was making in my message
was that ICANN funds all of the IANA naming functions but
does not fund all of the IETF and RIR costs related to IANA
processes.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Chuck</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span>From:</span></b><span> Seun
Ojedeji [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com">mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 03, 2015 1:28 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gomes, Chuck<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Bernard Turcotte (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com">turcotte.bernard@gmail.com</a>);
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG - DRAFT discussion
document for Singapore V3.5</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p>sent from Google nexus 4<br>
kindly excuse brevity and typos.<br>
On 3 Feb 2015 02:35, "Gomes, Chuck" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com">cgomes@verisign.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> Thanks Bernie.<br>
><br>
> · Regarding “Are your concerned about the actual
costs for operating the IANA functions, for protocols and
numbers, given these are currently funded by ICANN.” – Are
don’t think it is accurate to say that they are currently
funded by ICANN; ICANN may fund some costs but a large part of
the RIR and IETF functions are not funded by ICANN.<br>
><br>
While the RIRs contributes $800k+ annually (there is no clear
financial contribution made by the IETF body), it's not clear
how much is spent to operate numbers functions for instance.
So I think the intent of the question could be to understand
whether the community is interested in knowing the actual cost
of operating the respective functions since everything seem
lumped together at the moment.
<br>
Whether it's appropriate for the CWG to ask would be another
thing to consider, so perhaps rephrasing the question to refer
to names related function may be helpful. Something similar to
below:</p>
<p>" Given that the proposal from respective communities may be
different, are you concerned about knowing the actual costs
for operating the IANA functions related to names"</p>
<p>Regards<br>
> <br>
><br>
> Chuck<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> From: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>
[mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Bernard Turcotte<br>
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 8:13 PM<br>
> To: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG - DRAFT discussion
document for Singapore V3.5<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> All,<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> At the request of Lise and Jonathan, given the time-frame
is incredibly short, I am including version 3.5 of the
discussion document.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Based on 3.2 all changes are in track changes and each
change has been attribute via a comment bubble to the person
or persons who made the original comment/request.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> We have also included the questions which were suggested
on today's RFP3 call.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> As per Jonathan's request we do need to get this done
before heading to Singapore which for most of us will be
mid-day Wednesday of this week. As such we would appreciate
any significant comments by noon UTC of Wednesday this week at
which point we will finalize the document for general
distribution.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Thank You.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> B.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Ps clean and track changes version included.<br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>