[discuss] shifts in IANA/accountability discussion: your thoughts?

[Barry Shein]

I believe that any suggestion that the IANA function should be
transferred to any organization other than ICANN is largely a paper
tiger.

What other organization? A new organization? etc. The suggestions make
little practical sense.

That said, as you point out, the next important issue is how
accountability can be implemented which is not just a paper tiger.

In reality NTIA was mostly a paper tiger at least in their contractual
function. Of course as an arm of the US govt if they were sufficiently
motivated they could swing other mechanisms into play, perhaps
including drone strikes.

NTIA delayed approval once but it was not evident what alternative
they were seriously pursuing. It was largely symbolic to my
understanding.

Nonetheless there is a need for if not worst-case then bad-case
accountabilty. Worst-case (e.g., blatant corruption) tends to have
remedy by legal action.

Which seems to beg for extra-ICANN accountability with requirements
for ICANN's full participation and commitment.

But what would the remedies be?

For example, some major flaw in following by-laws etc followed by a
resistance to correct. What is the process for review and findins?
What is the remedy when merited?

The biggest danger is, as I allude to in the first part of this note,
that merely threatening to terminate the "contract" (function) with
ICANN may not be an effective remedy since as things stand it would
not be clear who else would pick up that function so, again, likely
just a paper tiger.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*