[discuss] FW: USG- IANA relationship (was: Interesting article)
jmamodio at gmail.com
Wed Jan 22 04:13:57 UTC 2014
ICANN contracts with registries, registrars are 100% independent of the IANA functions.
Even if the IANA contract was awarded to another entity, such entity must have been incorporated and based in the US with some key employees US citizens, which would have raised the same objections and concerns.
Until the USG decides to let IANA go, which will require an act of Congress, there is no practical solution to the objections of USG control of IANA and then the root zone.
> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org> wrote:
> Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> [2014-01-17 02:55:32 +0000]:
>> Even less practical. ICANN has contracts with a host of multinational businesses implicating billions of dollars; it can't just dissolve itself and reincorporate somewhere else.
> That's a very interesting point. Wouldn't this problem also have been created had the NTIA decided that they were going to award the IANA contract to a body other than ICANN? How would it have been resolved then?
More information about the discuss