[IANAtransition] Separation of Responsibilities from current SoW

Vint Cerf vint at google.com
Sun Apr 13 12:35:52 UTC 2014


maybe we should just declare the Internet to be a monarchy...


On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Michel Gauthier <mg at telepresse.com> wrote:

> Miles,
>
> norms are a documentation of normailty, as it is or as it is targeted.
> Standards are how to build from the norm. Norms are acknowledged or not.
> Stanadards are accepted or not. All of them are used on a voluntary basis.
> When the use is by the State, they become the law and are mandatory and
> enforced. If this is on an MS basis, each stakeholder decides to use them
> or not, what may result in consensus or dissensus. The hope is that
> consensuses being more advantageous to all, dissensus auto-reduces. This is
> just a hope.
>
> The international network works like the UK, since the begining the USG
> has the same role as the Queen. Not much, but enough for no one claiming to
> replace it. This insures stability. Now, the USG wants to abdicate and make
> the Kingdom accept its clark as its heir, Prince of Wales.
>
> Question is: what should the Queen, the clark, the Lords and the commons
> do for it to work?
>
> M G
>
>
> At 18:42 12/04/2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64The other option is for someone else to
>> step into the contractual
>> position now held by ICANN.  The question, of course, being
>> whom‚•H[˜[ÙÞHHÙY\ÛÛZ[™È˜XÚÈÈ\Èthe one John Curran (I think)
>>
>> raised - the bank card numbering scheme:
>> - The standard is maintained by ISO (akin to IETF)
>> - The "issuer identification database" is administered by ANSI (akin to
>> IANA)
>> - ISO has designated ANSI as the "registration authority" (akin to the
>> NTIA contract)
>> - it seems to all work
>> - all the parties involved are multi-stakeholder, voluntary organizations
>>
>> What's not clear are:
>> - the legal/contractual details of the ISO-ANSI designation
>> - what remedies are in place if ANSI doesn't do the job
>> - perhaps some of the specifics about why and how the registration
>> function shifted from the American Bankers Association to ANSI (I expect
>> there are some lessons to be learned that are directly applicable here)
>>
>> Note that there are multiple other standards body / registration
>> authority case studies that can be examined - both ISO and otherwise.
>>
>> Do we have anybody here who is closer to the history of standards bodies,
>> who might be able to add substance here?
>>
>> Miles Fidelman
>>
>> Richard Hill wrote:
>>
>>> Brian suggests that functional separation would be ensured if the
>>> current functional separation provision of the IANA contract is added to
>>> the ICANN Bylaws.
>>>
>>> I disagree, because the ICANN Board could at any time repeal or change
>>> such a provision in the ICANN Bylaws.
>>>
>> ]       Às why I keep saying that either the ICANN Bylaws have to be
>> drastically revised (including so that they cannot be changed by the Board)
>> or we should envisage structural separation.
>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>> šXÚ\™ ‚€£à£ãâÒÒÒÒÔ÷&­v­æÂÖW70age-----
>>
>>  From: ianatransition-bounces at icann.org
>>>> [mailto:ianatransition-bounces at icann.org]On Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
>>>> Sent: samedi, 12. avril 2014 07:17
>>>>
>>> ˆÎˆChip Sharp (chsharp)
>>
>>> Cc: ianatransition at icann.org
>>>>
>>> ˆÀubject: Re: [IANAtransition] Separation of Responsibilities from
>> ˆÝ\œ™[ ÛÕƒà ø(> On 12/04/2014 15:39, Chip Sharp (chsharp) wrote:
>>
>>> Ú[˜ÙH\™HÙY[\ÈÈ™HHÝ of discussion on the list about
>>>>
>>>> what is or is not in the current contract about separation of
>>>>
>>> ˆÛXÞH]™[Àpment and operational roles of the IANA function, I
>>
>>> ought it might be useful to pull the text from the Statement of Work.
>>> ˆg&öÒ43Ó"Ô4âÓ3RæB43Ó"Õ%-0043:
>>> ‚ƒãâ$2ã"ãR6W&F­öâöböÆ­7'FWfVÆ÷ÖVçBàd Operational Roles
>>>
>> ˆKHHÛÛ ˜XÝ܈Ú[[œÝ\™H at t designated IANA functions
>>
>>> ÝY™ˆY[X™\œÈÚ[›Ý[š@tiate, advance, or advocate any policy
>>>
>>>  development related to the IANA functions. The Contractor's staff
>>>>
>>> ˆ@ay respond to requests for information requested by interested
>>
>>  and affected parties as enumerated in Section C.1.3 to inform
>>>>
>>> ˆÛ™ÛÚ[™ÈÛXÞH\ØÝ\ÜÚ[ÛœÈ[™X^H™\]Y at st guidance or
>>
>>> clarification as necessary for the performance of the IANA functions."
>>>>
>>> ‚æBF†÷6R&WV—&Pments should be added to ICANN's By Laws. I
>>>
>> ˆØ[‰Ý\Ø@gree.
>>
>>  If that's all we're arguing about, the argument's over.
>>>>
>>> ‚ƒâ'&­à£à(ø _______________________________________________
>>
>>> X[˜]˜[œÚ][ÛˆXZ[[™È\݃â anatransition at icann.org
>>>
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition
>>>>
>>> ‚ƒà  }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}|_____________________
>>
>>  ianatransition mailing list
>>> ianatransition at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>> In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ianatransition mailing list
>> ianatransition at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ianatransition mailing list
> ianatransition at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/attachments/20140413/9ac18b3e/attachment.html>


More information about the ianatransition mailing list