[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] What does "accreditation" mean here? (was Re: Equifax hack worse than previously thought: Biz kissed goodbye to card expiry dates, tax IDs etc)

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:58:20PM -0800, Rod Rasmussen wrote:
> 
> One, couldn’t agree with you more on model two with a little bit of
> model one thrown in on some overall accreditation
> requirements. Hence I refer you to what the EWG report says about
> this in sections IV b & IV c

Yes, thanks for the reference.  I should indeed have mentioned that
this approximately what the EWG report says. 

> Two, I think Stephanie here is basically assuming the technical side of this but would like there to be widely accepted standards for various fields to meet in order to be accredited by whatever body is doing it.  So assuming the scissors accreditors exist, what standards about people being able to cut properly do those accreditors all use?
> 

This is, I think, what I am trying to avoid.  ICANN doesn't decide how
ISO picks the 3166 entries.  They might consult chicken entrails, for
all ICANN cares: it's an external authority that other people
recognise, so ICANN doesn't need to choose or evaluate or anything.
Similarly, ICANN doesn't need to decide who is a country.  The UN can
do that.  This model, which is really down to Jon Postel, is a good
idea because it prevents ICANN from having to make decisions that are
way beyond its authority or competence.

I think the more of that we can shed to other plausibly competent
bodies who are _already_ doing such jobs, the better.  I don't know
how INTERPOL decides who is LE and who isn't, and I don't want to have
to care.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com