<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<base href="x-msg://68/"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
span.apple-tab-span
{mso-style-name:apple-tab-span;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle26
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle27
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle28
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle29
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1751388689;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:306601336 134807567 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1756826226;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-409680900 -1728820426 134807555 134807557 134807553 134807555 134807557 134807553 134807555 134807557;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-start-at:0;
mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">OK. I think I understand better now.
<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></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">What set you off, apparently, was the word “instructions” which you mistakenly interpreted to mean: the ICANN board
unilaterally makes delegation decisions for ccTLDs. This is not what I meant at all, and I am pretty sure it’s not what Chuck is looking for either.
<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></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 note that you had to admit that the ICANN board _<i><span style="font-style:italic">does</span></i>_ play a role
in “</span></font><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">ensur[ing] that due process has been followed and documented.” Some of us would call that an approval
role, something akin to the NTIA’s authorization role. At the end of that process, I assume, it issues some kind of decision, approval, or statement, which may be no more than “go ahead and do what you proposed to do.” It would be perfectly reasonable to use
the word “instruction” for that, but if the word scares you I’ll use another. “Due process check”? “approval”?
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">(As an aside, some of us fervently wish that the board had the same limited role with respect to GNSO
policies.)<br>
</span></font><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></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 understand better now your point about how the institutional environment around ICANN had to be “educated” to
accept a method of making delegation decisions with a very limited role for the ICANN board (a view with which I am in violent agreement). And I think we are all sensitive to the need to do this in ways that avoid allowing governments to interfere with the
ccTLD associated with another government. You have admitted that ICANN (not the board, but the community in the broader sense) “provides the framework for policy development.” But you have clarified the way in which the IANA staff _<i><span style="font-style:italic">apply</span></i>_
that framework, subject to a board-level “traffic light metric,” and it is clear that this is more than clerical. I have no problem with PTI continuing in that role. I am not sure why these very subtle distinctions would create such indignation and fear on
your part; I think it’s constructive for these things to be teased out more carefully and taken into consideration in designing PTI.<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></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 don’t agree with you, however, that this means that separability should be discouraged or made inordinately difficult.
And if you’ll recall, that issue (ease of changing operators) was what initially provoked the controversy.
<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></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">The fact that ICANN and the community around cc’s has reached an acceptable and somewhat intricate balance around
how to do delegations does not mean that the right to change IANA function operator should be mitigated or made extremely difficult. This is a non-sequitur.
<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></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">To begin with, the knowledge is there now and is accepted politically. While it may have been difficult to establish
the right way to do redelegations over the course of the past 15 years, those methods are accepted and applied broadly now. Hence, it would not be that difficult to recreate them in a new operator and formalize them in a SLA. Indeed, it might be a good idea
to formalize the current procedure more, in the form of a contract or SLA with PTI, precisely so that maintenance of the methods that are so important to you is not completely reliant on the institutional memory of a single entity (the current IANA department).
Perhaps the ccNSO should have its own SLA with PTI, just as the address and protocols do. Making these things more explicit would reduce the community’s reliance on a single operator. Second, no one would want to change IFOs unless something were going seriously
wrong. If things are going wrong, it’s a bad idea to make it highly difficult to effectuate a change. Indeed, one of the things that might go wrong is that the IFO might start deviating from what you and other ccTLD operators consider proper procedure.
<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></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">To summarize, I don’t think your view of the role of PTI is inconsistent with mine; I do think that your conservatism
regarding a change in the IFO is unwarranted by any logic or argument you’ve made, and could easily backfire on you/other ccTLDs.<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></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<o:p></o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></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"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<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"> Martin
Boyle [mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk] <br>
<br>
</span></font><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">For ccTLDs, ICANN’s sole role is to provide the framework for policy development. (Caveat: as Paul
Kane would note, actually only for those ccTLDs that were members of the ccNSO. And actually the policy document did not come from ICANN anyway.) It is the IANA functions operator’s obligation to base its decisions on the policy in place – as identified
below.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In making its decisions:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Symbol"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">·<font size="1" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Neither the ccNSO nor the GAC has any say over the decisions except in that
they might (I suppose – to my knowledge this has never happened) raise questions with the Board about conformity to policy). In particular, I would hope that GAC members (in line with paragraph 63 of the Tunis Agenda) would not see it as their role to comment
– it would be interfering with a country’s national sovereignty.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Symbol"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">·<font size="1" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The current Board view (and one that I feel greatly comfortable with) is that
its role is simply to ensure that due process has been followed and documented. It uses a traffic-light metric and recognises that there might be different interpretations (for example on how multi-stakeholder engagement takes place). In essence and for
national sovereignty reasons, any role for the Board is simply to assure itself that the decision has been properly made. It has taken us a long time to get there, and I do not want to see us return to ICANN having a decision making role for ccTLD delegations:
been there and it doesn’t work.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Symbol"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">·<font size="1" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">All the analysis, document checking, evaluation, discussion with the interested
parties in a ccTLD amendment is currently carried out by the IANA functions operator. I failed to notice where we decided that the PTI as new IANA functions operator would only do the clerical and technical bit and I would love to know who does the detailed
work in the new model. It seems to leave behind in ICANN a key IANA functions operator role in the existing model.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">You can claim indignation all you like, but you still do not address my concerns about the appropriateness
of your model of ICANN Board instructions for ccTLDs. I stand to be corrected, but I’m not convinced yet.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">As for your interpretation of the new model: if this is right, then Nominet for one will not be able
to accept the current proposal. I suspect other ccTLDs will have similar problems. Incidentally, I seriously wonder why we have put all this effort in on separability if the only thing we are able to separate is the mechanical bit (which could all be done
automatically).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The learning process has taken place on the ICANN side of the divide over the years. ICANN is currently
the IANA contractor and the learning is also in place in the IANA team. I’ve given no thought to date about who validates changes – up to now I’ve assumed it would be the PTI Board as responsible for the IANA functions operator’s work. Placing it elsewhere
gives me two concerns:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo4"><![if !supportLists]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<font size="1" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The validation body (remember that we’ve agreed there should not be an authorisation
function in the new model) is the responsible agent: if it is in ICANN we cannot hold PTI responsible for any failure.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo4"><![if !supportLists]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">2.<font size="1" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The validation body operates a gatekeeper function outside the direct surveillance
of the mechanisms we have been discussing for so long. We will have additional work to make pretty clear what the limitations of that function actually are: I think it should
<i><span style="font-style:italic">only</span></i> be able to refer decisions back to the IANA functions operator (the operational team) on the basis that the process has not been followed or that the necessary documentation is not present or correct.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">So I’m still unconvinced by your arguments. They might work for gTLDs – and I’m happy for existing
arrangements for gTLDs to stay in place. But I don’t think what you assert works for ccTLDs,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Martin<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;font-weight:bold">From:</span></font></b><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"> Milton L
Mueller [</span></font><a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu"><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">mailto:mueller@syr.edu</span></font></a><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">]
<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b> 01 May 2015 14:53<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b> Martin Boyle; 'Gomes, Chuck'; 'CW Lists'; 'Grace Abuhamad'<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Cc:</span></b> 'cwg-stewardship@icann.org'<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b> RE: [CWG-Stewardship] A few additional comments for … Two additional webinars on 6-7 May<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"></a><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><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">
Martin Boyle [</span></font><a href="mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk</span></font></a><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">]
</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Boyle: Obviously then I’m misunderstanding something Milton.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM: You are.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">> The IANA Functions operator (IFO) should simply take ICANN’s instructions.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Boyle: Err, no! The IANA functions operator should base its decisions on agreed policy. In ccTLD
cases, rfc1591 is now supplemented (informed) by the work of the Framework of Interpretation Working Group.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM: which is part of the ccNSO, which is part of….ICANN. Or are you asserting it is part of IANA?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Boyle: It also has advice from the GAC 2005 Principles.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM: GAC is part of….ICANN. Or are you asserting it is part of IANA?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Boyle: ICANN (as the Board) does not have a role in telling the IANA functions operator what to do
in the case of ccTLD delegations or revocations.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM: This is where the misunderstanding resides. When I said “ICANN” I meant the policy-making side
of the ICANN/IANA split, which includes not just the board, but the policy making entities such as ccNSO, GNSO, the ACs. When I say IANA “takes instructions” there could still be ambiguities about the exact way in which those instructions are issued, and by
whom, and when, but clarifying that is one of the virtues of separation. I think we both agree that once a policy is set, IFO should implement it, and that IFO does not make the policy or have discretion as to whether to implement it.
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Boyle: This is fundamental – clear separation of policy and the IANA functions operator should not
be undermined by ICANN giving instructions.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM: Agreed. My goal is precisely the clear separation of policy and the IFO. This should be clear.
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Boyle: The issue – and hence the complexity – is about who actually has the right to make the decisions
and direct the IANA functions operator. The role of the IANA functions operator is to identify that a decision is appropriate – and the SOW gives some guidance to that, as does the work of the FOIWG. But it is absolutely not ICANN’s decision.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Boyle: Your failure to understand this is perhaps why you feel quite casual about re-bidding the IANA
functions operation and I do not. The ccTLD community has seen the friction caused by ICANN imposing arbitrary conditions or questioning legitimate national decisions. (This history of this high-handed approach was one of the motivations for the 2005 GAC
Principles.) I do not think that I’m alone in wanting to avoid as much as possible having to start the learning process again with a new contractor.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM: I think it’s clear from this exchange that you are failing to understand my point, and you are
overreacting - it’s not me failing to understand the risk of arbitrary and high-handed actions by ICANN. Really, that’s a pretty insulting and uninformed assertion for you to make, given my role in analysing and leading attempts to reform the accountability
problems at ICANN. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM: As for “starting this learning process over with a new contractor,” the learning process has to
take place on the ICANN side of the divide, not at the IANA contractor, and be reflected in the ICANN-IFO contract. The problems you mention have occurred precisely because IANA has been a wholly controlled department of the ICANN board. Any contract between
ICANN and an IFO could and should clearly account for the concerns you have and make sure that ICANN’s board cannot issue “instructions” that are not authorized or approved by the proper parties on the policy making side of the divide.
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">--MM<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>