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

[Avri Doria]

On 01-Dec-14 20:25, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> Honestly at this point I think something is not clear here. Can you
> confirm if this PRT is within ICANN or not because your message above
> is implying outside. The second question is, what are the "IANA
> operation" related issues that ICANN board could say no to? and how is
> the accountability track fixing/addressing that. 

a few of us were talking about this evening over Eurodig drings and over
dinner.

I have come to believe the the MRT is really the ICANN Community as we
know + others, but instead of sending its decisions to the Board for
blessing it sends its decision to the Contract Co. for execution.

It has been obvious for a while that the ICANN community and  ICANN
Corporate are separate. So I have no trouble imagining that for the
purposes of the MRT we organize what is essentially the stakeholders
invovled in the ICANN community + some other parts of the Internet
community into the MRT. Pretty much exactly just as we done with the ICG.

As for who pays for the whole sructure we are talking about, it should
be the IANA contractor, ICANN at this point, as part of its zero cost
support of the IANA function.  The only thing that seems like it may
require outside funding is the RFP/rebid process.  And for that we just
follow the example we have been taught by ICANN Corporate and Contract
Co. charges the applicants for the IANA contract an application fee
sufficient for the process to be, as they say, cost neutral.

So it is not within ICANN, but it is formed by the ICANN Community with
others.

avri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141201/57426143/attachment.html>