[CCWG-ACCT] [ccTLDcommunity] ICANN transition

[Mathieu Weill]

Dear Nigel,

I too respect this source. However ICANN staff as well as others have since then provided some clarifications. The statement below does not, apparently, capture ICANN's position. We may not be wasting our time, after all. 

Regarding the ability to move IANA out of ICANN, I will point you to the CWG report, which expressly addresses this issue, which it refers to as Separation. Others on this list could provide further details I'm sure. 

Best,

Mathieu Weill
---------------
Depuis mon mobile, désolé pour le style

> Le 5 mai 2015 à 16:34, Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net> a écrit :
> 
> "ICANN has verbally represented that they will reject any proposed agreement in which ICANN is not deemed the sole source prime contractor for the IANA functions in perpetuity."
> 
> 
> If this statement, made publicly, and from a respected source, is literally true, aren't we all wasting our time??
> 
> Surely a starting point HAS to be that we (ccTLDs) need the accountability that potentially the ccTLD part of IANA role could be moved if the current function operator does not come up to scratch?
> 
> What does the CCWG think?
> 
> 
> Nigel Roberts
> _______________________________________________
> ccTLDcommunity mailing list
> ccTLDcommunity at cctld-managers.org
> http://www.lists.cctld-managers.org/mailman/listinfo/cctldcommunity
> 
> To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe at lists.cctld-managers.org