[CWG-Stewardship] Do we really need a Contracting Co.?

[Avri Doria]

hi

On 01-Dec-14 16:20, Avri Doria wrote:
> On another topic, it concerns me that our draft document seems to have
> buried the notion of the periodic RFP.  RFP is listed on page 30, but
> Annex 3 seems to avoid mention at all.  and even in section 3, there
> is no notion of a periodic RFC, just the fact that there can be one. 
> I believe that without a peridoic RFP for the IANA contract there can
> be no accountability for the IANA function at ICANN or anywhere else
> for that matter - and this is not something that can be remedied by
> the CCSG Accountability.  The IETF and the RIRs can walk away from
> ICANN if they are ever unhappy.  The Names community needs the ability
> to move the IANA contract elsewhere as well.  Whether the contract is
> held in 'trust' for us by ISOC or Company Co. matters less to me that
> it be held externally.

on rereading the 1.6 version I see a function of the MRT (was PRT).

> o   Managing a rebidding process in the case of performance
> deficiencies or at regular rebidding intervals; 
>

this comes real close to what I mean by Periodic RFPs.  Was looking too
narrowly for identical text instead of reading what was actually there.

I think it is necessary and I am glad to see this there.

apologies.

avri

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141201/089a0c67/attachment-0001.html>