[Internal-cg] U.S. Government Funding Bill & ANA Transition

Tue Dec 16 08:22:01 UTC 2014

This thread has provided useful analysis on the prospects of Transition. I found Milton's piece of special interest.

Given the genesis of the Transition idea, and as far as process and timeline are concerned, there is only one entity which ccould legitimately change the ICG's course, and that is NTIA. So, while following closely the public debate unfolding on the Hill and elsewhere, we should proceed until we receive a FORMAL notification from NTIA to take a different course or to disband.

Jean-Jacques.

----- Mail original -----
De: "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
À: "Milton L Mueller" <mueller at syr.edu>
Cc: "ICG" <internal-cg at icann.org>
Envoyé: Vendredi 12 Décembre 2014 10:03:20
Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] U.S. Government Funding Bill & ANA Transition

Dear All, 
I agree with those who believe that we need to continue our works as planned 
I also agreed with those raising red light of alarming that the situation is not so straightforward as some of us believed. 
For me it was clear that there are people that are not fully in favour of the full fledged transition but keeping some legacy overnighting for DOC. 
Kavouss 

2014-12-12 6:22 GMT+01:00 Milton L Mueller < mueller at syr.edu > : 

The bill passed. Here's my blog on the topic, seeking a silver lining in this dark cloud 

http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/12/12/u-s-congress-man-in-the-middle-attack-on-iana-transition/ 

> -----Original Message----- 
> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto: internal-cg- 

> bounces at icann.org ] On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper 
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 4:45 PM 
> To: ICG 
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] U.S. Government Funding Bill & ANA Transition 
> 
> I would suggest that we (and the operational communities) proceed on our 
> current course and timeline until we receive information from NTIA or ICANN 
> (as the convener of stakeholders) that indicates a need to change course. 
> 
> Alissa 
> 
> On Dec 11, 2014, at 12:11 PM, Milton L Mueller < mueller at syr.edu > wrote: 
> 
> > I am not directly in touch with Washington people because I am traveling, 
> but I fear the situation is a bit worse than Adiel and Jari have described. 
> > 
> > The funding cutoff is intended to just stop the NTIA from doing the 
> transition. This means that assuming NTIA gets a proposal from us more or 
> less on time, they cannot do anything with it (unless they take it home and 
> work on their own time) until after Sept 30, 2015. 
> > 
> > Furthermore, since Republicans now control Congress the cutoff could be 
> extended again given the right conditions. 
> > 
> > 
> >> -----Original Message----- 
> >> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto: internal-cg- 
> >> bounces at icann.org ] On Behalf Of Adiel Akplogan 
> >> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 12:52 AM 
> >> To: ICG 
> >> Subject: [Internal-cg] U.S. Government Funding Bill & ANA Transition 
> >> 
> >> 
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20141210_breaking_us_government_funding 
> >> _bill_delays_iana_transition/ 
> >> 
> >> Just read this, and wondering if anyone has more insider information 
> >> about what it means to this process? My reading is that the 
> >> transition process cannot start before 30 September 2015. Which in my 
> >> sense is not that alarming as much as it effectively starts then (it 
> >> is a transition process). The other part that caught my attention is 
> >> the fact that the NTIA is required to inform Congress 45 days prior 
> >> to extending the IANA contract or taking any other decision in regard 
> >> to it. Which means that the NTIA will have up to the 15th of August 
> >> 2015 to evaluate the proposal we will submit, in order to present 
> >> their suggested action to Congress. That gives them only 15 formal 
> >> days from the time we have planned to submit our proposal. If we 
> >> build in the 14 days given to ICANN board to assess and deliver this 
> >> to the NTIA ... I don't see how we will achieve the target without 
> >> putting emphasis right now on the fact that our published timeline 
> >> has to be executed as a waterfalls process where many things has to be 
> done in parallel, particularly toward then end. 
> >> 
> >> - a. 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > Internal-cg mailing list 
> > Internal-cg at icann.org 
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> Internal-cg mailing list 
> Internal-cg at icann.org 
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg 
_______________________________________________ 
Internal-cg mailing list 
Internal-cg at icann.org 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg 

_______________________________________________
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg