[governance] [bestbits] JNC's comments on ICANN oversight (non) transition

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

I actually happen to agree with you that the current proposals are not particularly usable.  And I do like Paul’s proposal there, which also does bring technical rigour into the process.

tzdata is essentially Paul Eggert, and .int could remain with IANA - it sees very little change and has clear cut criteria on who gets a domain name.  I don’t see any reason why the status quo can’t continue for those special cases.

My question still remains - where is the consensus proposal that ALSO has technical rigour?

—srs

> On 28-Aug-2015, at 2:10 PM, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org> wrote:
> 
> Dear Suresh,
> The worst of the three community proposals is that by the names community, which is the only one pushing for a single operator of all current IANA functions.  Instead of noting this as a point of inconsistency, the ICG has gone with the names proposal as the basis for their suggestion.
> 
> The simple, workable alternative is that of separating the functions. Having this kind of separation is what I see as the natural outcome of what community leaders like Paul Wilson have called for:
> 
> http://ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/2015-June/000693.html
> 
> Further, the ICG has stated that some IANA functions (tzdata, .int), etc., aren't part of the transition since they aren't linked to the NTIA contract, and so is not part of their mandate.  So what will happen to those?  All in all, this is an incredibly confused exercise, and the ICG has done a poor job in bringing clarity to it.
> 
> Regards,
> Pranesh
> 
> Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net> [2015-08-28 13:56:22 +0530]:
>> Given a surprising lack of consensus on the substantials of several alternate proposals - is there one, especially which maintains the technical structure besides political considerations?
>> 
>> One concrete proposal that civil society AND the technical community can rally behind would be useful if we are not to damn the status quo and then not propose any usable alternate proposal.
>> 
>> So far both proposals I reviewed here - while quite well drafted - are still focused on the political considerations, and quite bare of technical details.
>> 
>> 
>>> On 28-Aug-2015, at 1:50 PM, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Parminder,
>>> Thank you very much for sending these.  Other than one or two small difference, I find myself almost fully in agreement.
>>> 
>>> The ICG report, which supports the PTI proposal by the names community, is utterly status quoist, and doesn't address the questions of jurisdiction at all.
>>> 
>>> In fact, it doesn't even call out the attempt by ICANN to ensure that PTI will be US-based (a requirement listed in P1. Annex S).
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Pranesh
>>> 
>>> parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> [2015-08-18 18:38:31 +0530]:
>>>> Just Net Coalition has submitted its comments to the process that is
>>>> coming up with proposals for what was supposed to be the transition of
>>>> ICANN's oversight from the US to a globally legitimate structure, but
>>>> the - now more or less final - proposals on the table do nothing of the
>>>> sort, and merely serve to cement the status quo.
>>>> 
>>>> We have submitted our comments in two parts
>>>> 
>>>> A overall political commentary can be found at
>>>> 
>>>> https://comments.ianacg.org/pdf/submission/submission19.pdf
>>>> 
>>>> A more technical response to finer issues and processes of the process
>>>> is at
>>>> 
>>>> https://comments.ianacg.org/pdf/submission/submission18.pdf
>>>> 
>>>> In sum, we have firmly rejected both, the legitimacy of the process and
>>>> the arbitrary manner in which it was conducted, and its result in the
>>>> form of the final proposals on the table.
>>>> 
>>>> parminder
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Pranesh Prakash
>>> Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
>>> http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283
>>> sip:pranesh at ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh at cis-india.org
>>> https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash
>>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Pranesh Prakash
> Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
> http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283
> sip:pranesh at ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh at cis-india.org
> https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash


-------------- 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