[ianatransition] separation and accountability

Avri Doria avri at acm.org
Fri Aug 1 23:31:56 UTC 2014


On 01-Aug-14 15:52, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> I think what I was arguing is that it is a critical subject for the
> transition from the NTIA _for the names community_.  As near as I can
> tell, the RIRs and IETF have all the accountability mechanism they
> need: if IANA-for-protocol-parameters had the same cloudy
> accountability problem that I freely admit sometimes appears to be a
> problem for names, then the IETF would have its remedy.  It could use
> a different registry provider.
> The RIRs have a different agreement with ICANN, but as a practical
> matter they too could just get togehther and ignore ICANN.  There
> wouldn't be anything ICANN could actually do about it.

I don't know it sound like the only recourse the IETF has for problems
is to wait until they get bad enough for the nuclear option.

Personally I think it is better to have intermediate solutions like
independent appeals panles and independent audits.

Guess it is just perspective, why use a screw driver when you have a
sledge hammer.


More information about the ianatransition mailing list