[discuss] let's get concrete

[Jordan Carter]

On 21 April 2014 05:41, DAVID JOHNSON <davidr.johnson at verizon.net> wrote:

> At some personal risk, I am going to emulate george and try to pose some
> concrete questions.
>
> If icann is to continue to perform the dns related iana functions, is that
> going to be just because they are doing it now, and want it, or because
> discussing any other option is "out of scope", or because some existing or
> new entity contacts with them to do it?
>

The second of those options would be bad for ICANN and bad for the DNS. If
ICANN is to continue with the function it should be because the well
considered transition plan that achieves community support has it as the
best place to operate it.

The difficulty of the third option is the "who does it" question. In the
whole environment I can't quite see a body other than ISOC that could
manage, but I don't think that'd achieve wide buy-in.


>
> If the mandate comes from some counter-party, what are the terms?
> (certainly good operation of the iana function. what other conditions?)
>

I'd hope that it was:

* Effective operation of the IANA functions
* Effective policy control for each IANA function being clearly located and
transparently connected to what IANA does

as a baseline.


>
> If there is such a contract, how would it be enforced?
>

IANAL


> What reason would there be to think the counter-party would enforce it?
>

If it took on that role of stewardship, it'd be a pretty useless steward to
fail to do the role.

Jordan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140421/418627aa/attachment.html>