[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] An important technical consideration about nature of the service (was Re: The overflowing list )

[Sam Lanfranco]

ICANN is neither Star Trek’s Starship Enterprise nor Nanny ICANN. In 
response to Stephanie’s questions here are short comments. For RDS ICANN 
is not going where nobody has gone before and it is not some sort of 
global Internet Nanny. ICANN should restrict itself to the minimum 
dataset it needs to conduct its business with Registries and Registrars 
within it DNS Remit. Full Stop!

Let Registries and Registrars deal with the “how to authenticate law 
enforcement requests” at the national and multilateral level. ICANN can, 
in the public interest, advise one and all on best policy there but it 
cannot weld an authentication process into its contracts. Within its 
remit ICANN has no right to do so. One might suspect that the Registries 
and Registrars are trying to off load onto ICANN work they should be 
sorting out among themselves, both nationally and multilaterally. That 
is how the rest of the world does it. There seems to be a tendency 
toward ICANN exceptionalism here. What ICANN does is important but it is 
not exceptional, it is business in the public interest. How it does it 
is exceptional: consensus policy (within the REMIT) based on a 
multistakeholder process.

Lastly, and this is important, this process is not about fixing 
something that is broken. Much of what works badly is actually at the 
national and multilateral level and outside ICANN’s remit in any event. 
At best the goal here is to improve a process, but there is no urgency. 
The work can be tiring but in the absence of urgency the rational 
decision is to slow the process down, to make it less burdensome and not 
result in hasty rash bad decisions.

Sam L.  NPOC/CSIH


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160720/ca2d103f/attachment.html>