<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">This is not complicated, nor is it a proxy war for anything. This has nothing to do with separability. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I'm merely trying to parse out the generic term or terms</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">My point is this. There are two groups one can identify with the provision of the IANA Functions:</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">1. The team of people that perform the service (currently a group of people under Elise Gerich; sometimes referred to as the "IANA Root Zone Management staff" for clarity (see <a href="https://www.iana.org/help/cctld-delegation">https://www.iana.org/help/cctld-delegation</a>))</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">2. The entity that houses (1), along with a lot of other people and stuff (currently, ICANN).</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I am perfectly happy for "IANA Functions Operator" to refer to Group (1) and not Group (2). If that's the case, I would not use the term "entity" in the footnote, which now reads "<span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%">The term IANA functions operator refers to the entity that provides the
service." I believe the term "entity" is confusing. The IANA Root Zone Management staff is not an entity. ICANN is an entity, but then you are bringing Group (2) into the definition. The IANA Functions Operator could be an entity in the future, but it is not now an entity. Hence, my confusion. I suggest modifying the footnote as follows, for clarity:</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style><span style="line-height:16.8666667938232px"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">"The term "IANA Functions Operator" means the group that performs the service." If "group" isn't quite right, perhaps "unit"?</font></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">If that is the case, do we need a generic term for Group (2)? Maybe we don't, at least not in the Principles document. If we don't, I suggest one change below to avoid ambiguity.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">In 7(ii) and 8(iii), where the term ICANN is used, it is clearly not referring to ICANN as the IANA Functions Operator, but to ICANN as the policy-making and contracting body. Things get muddy in Section 9(i), which says "<span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%">To separate the IANA Functions from the current operator (i.e. ICANN) if
warranted and in line with agreed processes." In order to avoid ambiguity i would suggest modifying 9(i) to state:</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%">"</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%">To separate the IANA Functions from the current operator (i.e. ICANN (as the IANA Functions Operator)) if
warranted and in line with agreed processes"</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%">Greg</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;line-height:115%">Greg</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 12:12 PM, 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:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Martin and Greg<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I think Martin is correct here and I hope people are not using this terminological debate as a proxy war for internal
vs. external. <u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">The principle of separability is well established and accepted, so as Martin suggests it makes no sense to describe
the IANA functions operator in a way that identifies it with ICANN in our descriptions.
<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">--MM<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-weight:bold">From:</span></font></b><font face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>] <b><span style="font-weight:bold">On Behalf Of
</span></b>Martin Boyle<br>
<br>
</span></font><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
</div><span class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">The terminology, “IANA functions operator” has to cope with the concept that it is a small team in
a big organisation (currently as a team in the Global Domains Division of ICANN) through to it being structurally separated to an entity as yet unknown but which might be entirely independent of any other body – say
<i><span style="font-style:italic">Trotters Independent Traders (New York, Paris, Peckham)</span></i>. Hence the choice of the word “entity.”<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">However, interpreting the IANA functions operator as ICANN does not make sense when read in 9.i: “To
separate ICANN from the current operator (i.e. ICANN) if warranted and in line with agreed processes” does not make sense. “To separate the IANA Functions from the current operator (i.e. ICANN) if warranted and in line with agreed processes” does.<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>