<p dir="ltr">I don't see the inaccuracy in my statement; my point is that informal interaction with some RIR members should not determine how CWG acts/reacts. We are in agreement that no formal statement has come out from the RIR community on this subject and i think it's because we've not asked them.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Maybe the PC is then our way of formerly asking them.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Just for the record, I don't think change in IANA management to a yet to be clearly defined/tested structures should be seen as "no difference" especially if the community thinks everything is running well under the current management.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards<br>
sent from Google nexus 4<br>
kindly excuse brevity and typos.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 19 Apr 2015 21:33, "Milton L Mueller" <<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mueller@syr.edu</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><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 size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Seun,<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Please try to be accurate. I haven’t made any assertions about what “a whole community wants”
<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I did say I have talked to people in RIRs who might prefer a legally separated IANA.
<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">In fact, your comments are supporting my point that RIRs have not made any formal statements either way.<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">And as noted countless times before, because the RIRs have yet to write their contract, it shouldn’t make any difference
to them whether their future contract is with IANA services provided by a department of ICANN or by an affiliate.
<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" 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 size="2" 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 size="2" 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 size="2" 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 size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-weight:bold">From:</span></font></b><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Seun
Ojedeji [mailto:<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>] <br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b> Sunday, April 19, 2015 4:24 PM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b> Milton L Mueller<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Cc:</span></b> avri; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b> Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [client com] Draft: Summary of Legal Structure for CWG Proposal<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">sent from Google nexus 4<br>
kindly excuse brevity and typos.<br>
On 19 Apr 2015 20:19, "Milton L Mueller" <<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">mueller@syr.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
....And the contract between the RIRs and ICANN or PTI hasn’t been written yet, so it could easily designate PTI as the counterparty. No one from the numbers community has expressed any concern about that, and having been in contact with several people in that
community I suspect that, as with protocols, some might prefer that.<br>
><br>
SO: I happen to be involved in the numbers community and I am not sure I have seen any formal discussion about what you say above Milton. I think it's important we base our actions on transparently provided facts. Sometime ago the chair of CRISP formerly wrote
the CWG asking that they be informed of any part of the names proposal that could affect them. Noting from the CWG has been sent in that regard so I think it's a little out of line to make assumption on what a whole community wants.<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Regards<br>
> <br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
><u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div>