[governance] Root Server

[parminder]

On Tuesday 29 July 2014 03:48 AM, David Conrad wrote:
> Parminder,
>
> On Jul 28, 2014, at 4:28 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net 
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>> wrote:
>> It misleadingly declares IANA 'function' to be  a merely clerical one.
>
> While I'm sure you will not believe me, having (long ago and I doubt 
> things have changed) been the general manager of IANA, this 
> declaration is _not_ misleading.  The IANA functions are, in most 
> cases, editing a text file according to externally defined policies 
> and publishing the result. I know that is boring and doesn't play to 
> particular political agendas, but it is reality.

David,

We here need to focus what is the subject of global controversy, and to 
deny that there has been any controversy at all, would be, well, 
inappropriate, or mis leading. So, you got it backward. You choose the 
technical implementation aspects of IANA - which ICANN does - and 
declare it as non political controversial. Of course, it is. But simply 
is not the point.

Since there patently has indeed been a historic controversy - and US is 
right now reacting to it through offering an IANA transition- I simply 
cannot understand why you are denying it, which simply would mean that 
those who ever saw it as a controversy are kind of stupid.

There is an 'Authority' side of Internet Assigned Names Authority  - 
which vests with the govt of the US, whereby it both contracts the IANA 
technical/ implementation function, and oversees it, especially 
confirming or not any root zone changes...

Do you deny this fact?

If you do not, let me tell you it is this IANA authority exercised by 
the US gov which is the subject of controversy and should therefore be 
focussed on in the IANA transition discussions. No one is bothered about 
the technical/ implementation function undertaken by ICANN, for the 
simple reason that, as you rightly observe, it is politically non 
controversial.

It is the holder of IANA authority, and its role, which is the subject 
of IANA transition. Not whom the IANA authority will give the IANA 
contract, which is a subsequent issue. IANA transition is about 
transitioning the authority to award the IANA contract, and to oversee 
IANA functions,  esp root zone changes. This authority today is with the 
US gov.... We need to see where it should go from here. ICANN taking 
over this authority is one view, which is very fine as one view.

But what astonishes me a lot is, and I consider as misleading, that the 
whole focus has been shifted from this 'authority' with the US, to 
simple acts of technical implementation of the functions which ICANN as 
US contractor does, which is not at all controversial.

What astonishes me even more is that civil society does not get up and 
call the bluff.

parminder


>
> Regards,
> -drc
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140731/b0cdb64a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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