[CWG-Stewardship] DT-O recommendations/responses for Public Comment Review Tool

[Greg Shatan]

Suzanne,

Thanks for your email.  I think you raise an important point:

I think it depends on what one considers “IANA”— staff involved in the
> day-to-day tasks covered by the SLAs, DNS operations (which has at least
> sometimes been considered administratively separate from “IANA”,
> contractors hired to look into specifics of various activities to be
> undertaken by IANA staff, etc.


​"What one considers "IANA""​

goes beyond the budget process -- indeed, if we sort out what one considers
"IANA," the issue of which budget item goes where pretty much gets solved.

I think the inquiry has to be a little bit different -- not "what does one
consider "IANA"" but rather *"What (and who) will go into PTI"*?  I've
worked on more than a few divestitures, spin-outs, reorganizations, etc.,
and dividing people, things, IP, contracts, etc., is is never quite as easy
as one thinks (which is not to say it's complex).  To take your example,
will "DNS operations" be moved to PTI?  Are there projects that benefit or
relate to IANA that are carried out outside of the team that is moving
(virtually) to PTI?  Are there shared assets or services?  There are
certainly enterprise and back-office services that ICANN provides to the
IANA staff and operations; these can be provided under a services agreement
of some sort.

I agree that we don't need to delve into this now.  But soon enough, we'll
need to pull out the sorting hat and we will see what and who goes where
(and maybe to more than one place)....


Greg


  ​


On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> On Jun 3, 2015, at 10:58 PM, David Conrad <david.conrad at icann.org> wrote:
>
> Greg,
>
> Apologies for the slow response — a bit buried in stuff right now.
>
> I'm going on what Suzanne said, which is that the consulting that has been
> done to date to support IANA was "not undertaken directly by IANA staff."
>
>
> I'm not sure that's accurate.
>
>
> Thanks David for the clarification, and I think I see where we diverged—
> besides that you’re more in touch with the day-to-day operations than I am.
> Apologies to all for any confusion from what I said.
>
> I think it depends on what one considers “IANA”— staff involved in the
> day-to-day tasks covered by the SLAs, DNS operations (which has at least
> sometimes been considered administratively separate from “IANA”,
> contractors hired to look into specifics of various activities to be
> undertaken by IANA staff, etc.
>
> But rather than push further into those details here, I’ll happily concede
> David’s clarifications, as IMHO they illustrate that our definitions may be
> ambiguous and need to be clarified.
>
> In addition, there are a number of aging software systems currently in use
> by IANA staff that are (or were) slated to be replaced, e.g., the PEN
> request/management system.
>
>
> This is an excellent example of the kind of functionality that PTI needs
> to be able to support, whether in-house or out-sourced.
>
> thanks,
> Suzanne
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150604/3f89ec10/attachment.html>