[discuss] [IANAtransition] A Summary of IANA Oversight Transition Tasks and Issues

[joseph alhadeff]

John:

This gets to the point I was trying to make, but obviates the 
possibility of abuse among technical actors in nontechnical functions.  
I completely agree that I want people with appropriate skills and 
knowledge working these issues, but they are also subject to rules that 
need to be enforced to prevent work in combination to deter new entrants 
or collusion to the disadvantage of customers. It is the concern related 
to these more societal issues not a direct oversight of their technical 
function,  which they have a self-interest to get right in order to be 
more successful, that I am trying to address.  While there are laws that 
cover many of these issues, applying them may be fairly complex.  Would 
it not make sense to create some low overhead mechanism that can better 
address these issues?  It may be more cost effective for the providers 
as well as customers...

Joe
On 4/2/2014 8:45 AM, John Curran wrote:
> On Apr 2, 2014, at 5:07 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
>> I think this is an interesting analogy with regard to ICANN oversight issue. Not everyone should repair cars or pave roads, but everyone will be involved in broad/ higher oversight of these functions - there are regulations both about cars and roads. And such regulation - at at arms length from implicated technical functions, derive their authority from legitimate political bodies, which in term derive it from the public.
>> ...
>> As to how boundaries between technical and oversight function are drawn, it is obvious that these have to be drawn in a political legitimate manner, whereby clear rules are instituted for the oversight role. This drawing of boundaries is a higher political function, and not a technical one. Clear rules and possibility of judicial review of decisions of the oversight body should ensure that there is no illegitimate interference in technical and operational functions of the technical bodies (this much is clearly said in Tunis agenda).
> Parminder -
>   
>      You seem to conflate the act of considering public policy mandates with the
>      potentially quite unrelated act of oversight of technical coordination functions.
>
>      To continue the analogy, the (implied governmental) party that engages in
>      regulation or rule-making on behalf of the public for establishing minimum
>      safety equipment for automobiles does not necessarily have to be the same
>      party that provides any necessary oversight to an association doing the
>      development and coordination of automobile safety standards; the former
>      is a public safety regulator while the latter might be entirely provided by
>      normal judicial authority regarding a trade or standard association's
>      compliance with its incorporation/purpose.
>
>      If you do not believe this to be the case, it would be good to understand
>      why it is necessary to explicitly commingle these otherwise quite distinct
>      governmental roles.
>
> Thanks!
> /John
>
> Disclaimer: My views alone.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss