[discuss] Interesting article

Tue Jan 14 14:42:57 UTC 2014

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Roland Perry <
roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:

> In message <CAMzo+1bYKXDJVt_zckNGnacn32j4qwEXXGsV8L3YMo2ts
> Yd3XQ at mail.gmail.com>, at 07:37:24 on Tue, 14 Jan 2014, Jorge Amodio <
> jmamodio at gmail.com> writes
>
>  I'm not sure what do you mean about "requirements of US government".
>>
>
> If you read the tender documents for the latest IANA contract, you'll find
> quite a bit of (very US-centric) stuff about the required geographic
> credentials of any qualifying organisation (and certain of its staff).

I read all 65 pages of it, and this is true ONLY as the contractor for the
IANA function, regardless if it is ICANN or not.

Being ICANN the contractor has probably some positives, but on the other
hand confuses a lot of people since the role as a contractor and policy
development and other roles are (or are supposed to be) totally separate.

So if you abstract the IANA contract, besides the requirements as
US/California non-profit corporation there are no other requirements from
the USG.

So the US-centric issue is not ICANN, but IANA.

-J
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140114/45e85326/attachment.html>