[CWG-Stewardship] Comment on Annex S Re: For your review - CWG-Stewardship Proposal v2

Andrew Sullivan ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Wed Jun 3 23:47:16 UTC 2015


The sample term sheet in Annex S in the cost/price section includes
"the IETF, the IAB, 5 RIRs;" in square brackets.  Is that to indicate
that the relevant inclusions would depend on what contractual
relationships were in place?

In any case, this section appears to be at odds with previous ones,
that claim that PTI is supported entirely by ICANN and that ICANN is
the one doing the charging.  I don't have specific text, but I think
it ought to be made consistent.

In the "separation" section, the term there has caused the IETF (and,
I might suggest, this very CWG) a certain amount of grief, because
under the most broad interpretation it excludes the capable and
informed IANA staff from telling anyone anything about how stuff
actually works.  That's clearly not what we want.  How about this:

---%<---cut here---
PTI staff members will not initiate, advance, or advocate any policy development related to the IANA functions.  This section shall not be construed to prevent contributions by staff members by way either of background information or direct text contribution to any document, provided both that the PTI staff are not the only authors of the contribution and that the primary function of the staff member's contribution is in supplying relevant IANA experience and insight.
--->%---cut here---

Or anyway, something along those lines.

Best regards,


Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com

More information about the CWG-Stewardship mailing list