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

[Milton L Mueller]

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Burr, Becky

ICANN needs to be accountable for (1) developing and implementing policy through the multistakeholder process in accordance with its bylaws and (2) actually performing the technical IANA functions in a competent way.   Proper independent review and redress works for the first, and sometimes for the second, but it doesn't guarantee technical competence.  The ability to move IANA functions out of ICANN is most important in the situation where ICANN is incompetent and can't or won't  fix the problem.  I continue to think that we are making this process much more difficult by trying to deal with broader accountability issues in this track.


Becky:
I don't think this group is trying to solve all the broader accountability issues, nor should it. We are just recognizing that there is some risk that a technically competent but rogue ICANN could abuse its control of IANA to circumvent legitimate policy processes. I think that risk is small to begin with, but I believe that we can reduce it to the vanishing point by making it the basis for moving the IANA functions out of ICANN.

There is nothing terribly difficult about that, because the same separability capability that responds to an incompetent IANA would be used in the case of a rogue IANA.

Milton L Mueller
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org<http://internetgovernance.org/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141202/e142c194/attachment.html>