[CWG-Stewardship] Appropriate Stewardship safeguards.....

[Seun Ojedeji]

I believe so, with minor edit; It's the naming community as structured
within the IFRT and the SCWG. Secondly, only the IANA functions relating to
names would be applicable(although I expect that other OCs would have moved
their functions long before names is done moving theirs) and lastly, it's
the needs as defined in the ICANN/PTI SLE.

Regards

Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
Dear All

Firstly, let me say in the past with NTIA's stewardship (including the IANA
contract rebid) the ICANN/IANA have done an excellent job at serving the
naming
community.

However, I would like clarification on the CWG's desired mechanics of the
independence of the IANA Functions Operator from or being "impacted" by
ICANN
Corporate interests.

My understanding was that the PTI was "separate" from ICANN (yet
internal to ICANN).
My understanding was that there was a pre-determined escalation path to
resolve disputes between IANA operator and its customers
My understanding was that in the event of a failure by ICANN/PTI to meet the
needs of the Registry naming community - the IANA functions would be
stripped
out.... (in a controlled pre-determined manner).

Can I be reassured that my assumptions are correct ???

Thanks

Best

Paul



_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20151028/a19104e6/attachment.html>