<div dir="ltr"><div>Thanks for the follow-up Theresa, this was my understanding as well<br><br></div>Regards<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Theresa Swinehart <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:theresa.swinehart@icann.org" target="_blank">theresa.swinehart@icann.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Andrew,<br>
<br>
Thank you for the statement, and agree it's an important piece to read. To<br>
add to this, we are raising concerns because suggested new text to the<br>
language raise a legal issue for us under the existing contract ICANN has<br>
with NTIA. This is hopefully temporary as the NTIA contract eventually<br>
expires. In fact, this case is an excellent example of a reason why the<br>
transition is so essential. We have no desire to affect the results of the<br>
community processes. We also believe that it would be more appropriate to<br>
maintain the status quo until the conclusion of the transition process to<br>
not pre-empt or create a perception of pre-empting any of the community<br>
consensus process around any areas in the finalization of the transition.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Theresa<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 4/30/15 3:51 PM, "Andrew Sullivan" <<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>Hi,<br>
><br>
>I encourage those who are interested in this go and read the message<br>
>exactly as it was posted, and not a summary from someone else. The<br>
>message is at<br>
><a href="http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01680.html" target="_blank">http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01680.html</a>.<br>
>It's not long. I encourage people to read it carefully, because it<br>
>was written that way. I shall not say more than I said in that<br>
>message, however.<br>
><br>
>Best regards,<br>
><br>
>A<br>
><br>
>On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:29:30AM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
>> I am forwarding the email below, as it will be of interest to this<br>
>>group as<br>
>> well. It would also be of interest to hear the views of those who are<br>
>> involved in the process (to the extent that is possible given ongoing<br>
>> negotiations).<br>
>><br>
>> Greg<br>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
>> From: Edward Morris <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>><br>
>> Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:14 AM<br>
>> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Ominous update on the IANA transition<br>
>> To: Accountability Cross Community<br>
>><<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
>> ><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> I think this post on the NCSG list by Dr. Mueller might be of interest<br>
>>to<br>
>> those of us working on Accountability.<br>
>><br>
>> Best,<br>
>><br>
>> Ed Morris<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
>> From: Milton L Mueller <<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mueller@syr.edu</a>><br>
>> Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:27 PM<br>
>> Subject: Ominous update on the IANA transition<br>
>> To: <a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@listserv.syr.edu">NCSG-DISCUSS@listserv.syr.edu</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Dear NCSG:<br>
>><br>
>> It¹s now official: ICANN doesn¹t even want to let the IETF have a<br>
>>choice of<br>
>> its IANA functions operator.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Those of you who read my blog post on ICANN¹s interactions with the<br>
>>numbers<br>
>> community<br>
>><br>
>><<a href="http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/04/28/icann-wants-an-iana-functio" target="_blank">http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/04/28/icann-wants-an-iana-functio</a><br>
>>ns-monopoly-and-its-willing-to-wreck-the-transition-process-to-get-it/><br>
>> will already know that ICANN is refusing to accept the consensus of the<br>
>> numbers community by recognizing its contractual right to terminate its<br>
>> IANA functions operator agreement with ICANN. In that blog, I referred<br>
>>to<br>
>> second-hand reports that IETF was encountering similar problems with<br>
>>ICANN.<br>
>> Those reports are now public; the chairs of the IETF, IAB and IETF<br>
>> Administrative Oversight Committee have sent a letter to their community<br>
>> <<a href="http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01680.html" target="_blank">http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01680.html</a>><br>
>> noting that ICANN is refusing to renew their supplemental service level<br>
>> agreement because it includes new provisions designed to facilitate<br>
>>change<br>
>> in IANA functions operators should IETF become dissatisfied with ICANN.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> These are truly shocking moves, because in effect ICANN¹s legal staff is<br>
>> telling both the numbers and the protocols communities that they will<br>
>>not<br>
>> accept the proposals for the IANA transition that they have developed as<br>
>> part of the IANA Stewardship Coordination Group (ICG) process. In both<br>
>> cases, the proposals were consensus proposals within the affected<br>
>> communities, and were approved by the ICG as complete and conformant to<br>
>>the<br>
>> NTIA criteria. Thus, ICANN is in effect usurping the entire process,<br>
>> setting itself (rather than ICG and NTIA) as the arbiter of what is an<br>
>> acceptable transition proposal.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> The key point of conflict here seems to be the issue of whether ICANN<br>
>>will<br>
>> have a permanent monopoly on the provision of IANA functions, or whether<br>
>> each of the affected communities names, numbers and protocols will<br>
>>have<br>
>> the right to choose the operator of their global registries.<br>
>>Separability<br>
>> is explicitly recognized by the Cross community working group on Names<br>
>>as a<br>
>> principle to guide the transition, and was also listed as a requirement<br>
>>by<br>
>> the CRISP team. And the IETF has had an agreement with ICANN giving them<br>
>> separability since 2000 (RFC 2860<br>
>><<a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2860" target="_blank">https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2860</a>>).<br>
>> Yet despite the wishes of the community, ICANN seems to insist on a<br>
>> monopoly and seems to be exploiting the transition process to get one.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Of course, a severable contract for the IANA functions is the most<br>
>> effective and important form of accountability. If the users of IANA are<br>
>> locked in to a single provider, it is more difficult to keep the IANA<br>
>> responsive, efficient and accountable. Given the implications of these<br>
>> actions for the accountability CCWG, I hope someone on that list will<br>
>> forward this message to their list, if someone has not noted this event<br>
>> already.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Milton L Mueller<br>
>><br>
>> Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor<br>
>><br>
>> Syracuse University School of Information Studies<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/" target="_blank">http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/</a><br>
>><br>
>> Internet Governance Project<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://internetgovernance.org" target="_blank">http://internetgovernance.org</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">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>
><br>
><br>
>--<br>
>Andrew Sullivan<br>
><a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a><br>
>_______________________________________________<br>
>CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
><a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">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>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">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>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><font color="#888888"><blockquote style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex;font-family:garamond,serif">
<i><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Seun Ojedeji,<br style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Federal University Oye-Ekiti<br style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">web: </span><a href="http://www.fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">http://www.fuoye.edu.ng</a><br>
<span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Mobile: <a value="+2348035233535">+2348035233535</a></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><br></i><i><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">alt email:<a href="http://goog_1872880453" target="_blank"> </a><a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng</a></span></i><br><br><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The key to understanding is humility - my view !<br></blockquote></blockquote></font><br></div></div>
</div>