[governance] Digital Agenda: Commission welcomes improvements in new IANA contract

[Daniel Kalchev]

On Nov 15, 2011, at 2:59 PM, Roland Perry wrote:

>> Then, in a completely separate process, IANA is delegating this string
>> to an registry.
> 
> So you don't think an ICANN exchange of letters or accountability frameworks with a potential country manger is binding on IANA's choice of who the manager will be?

This is an interesting question.

In my opinion (*) the idea of these letters were twofold: first, to make sure ICANN gets sufficiently documented support by the community (ccTLD managers and if possible also relevant Governments) and secondly, to impose specific limitations on the behavior of that respective ccTLD manager and Government.
I have no evidence that these letters have anything to do with the IANA function.

By the way, I prefer to use "IANA" in such cases, instead of "the IANA function", because IANA is what it is. The other term assumes IANA is something ICANN does for the community, which is not the case, because that "function" is a result of a contract.

I haven't see anywhere mention of "Internic function by IBM" for example…

Further to your question it occurs to me, that this exchange of letters with a proposed new manager is a problematic. Is this a form of bribing?

Daniel

(*) This is my own personal opinion based on many years observation of facts and events and does not necessarily match the official position of any entity I may represent or me member of.____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t