<div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px;color:rgb(0,0,0)">There are a numerous options as to how the numbers and protocols communities might contract for the IANA services that the CWG is recommending reside in a legally separated PTI. At this stage, it would be presumptuous to know how those communities might do that. We should simply let them respond on the record in public comment.</span></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><a href="http://internetgovernance.org" target="_blank"></a></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Avri Doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
Hi,<br>
<br>
On this issue the ICANN names solution should presume that ICANN remain the service contractor with the other operational communities in any model. It is only if these other operational communities initiate a request for a change to a direct service contract
with IANA that it becomes an issue. As far as I know they have neither done so, nor desire to do so.<br>
<br>
I do not see an ambiguity in this. While there may be an opportunity for them to think about it, there is no requirement or implication that they do so.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
avri</font></span><span class=""><br>
<br>
<div>On 19-Apr-15 00:53, Andrew Sullivan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Unstated in the above is that, depending on whether we have
fundamental bylaws or an affiliate, there are either one or two
options for other communities. ICANN can be indifferent to how to
proceed on this, but the other communities may need to make a
decision:
• Continue the agreement with ICANN, who then undertake to have PTI do
the work for those other communities. This is the only option
available if PTI is a department of ICANN under some fundamental
bylaw(s), but it remains available in case PTI is an affiliate.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span class=""><hr style="border:none;color:#909090;background-color:#b0b0b0;min-height:1px;width:99%">
<table style="border-collapse:collapse;border:none">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="border:none;padding:0px 15px 0px 8px"><a href="http://www.avast.com/" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png" alt="Avast logo">
</a></td>
<td>
<p style="color:#3d4d5a;font-family:"Calibri","Verdana","Arial","Helvetica";font-size:12pt">
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. <br>
<a href="http://www.avast.com/" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a> </p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
</span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>