[discuss] Roadmap for globalizing IANA
joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com
Tue Mar 4 14:54:52 UTC 2014
While I am not as well versed in these issues and their history of some
of the more frequent commentators, it would seem that accountability is
often benefited by and predicated on a separation of duties in
oversight. The new organization seems to rely on self-interested
parties having an alignment of interest with the public good as opposed
to the more traditional concept of separation of duties/interest in
oversight. Am I missing the checks and balances?
WOn 3/3/2014 9:43 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> Nii, thanks for your questions. Most of them are actually answered in
> the paper itself, but I will answer your questions directly.
> >Why is removing USG not mean just that? End of contract
> First, it would be the end of 2 contracts, not one. ICANN and
> Verisign. You cannot just end the IANA functions contract.
> Second, both contracts contain serious accountability measures.
> However wrongly conceived the idea of unilateral U.S. oversight is,
> how do we ensure that the root zone is managed properly and what is
> the recourse if the root zone managers are either negligent,
> incompetent or corrupt? What do you replace the IANA contract with?
> The reason for a DNSA is that registries have the strongest incentive
> to get root zone management right. It is their data that the root zone
> contains. To ensure impartial administration we create a
> nondiscriminatory right to own DNSA to all registries?
> >What problem is being solved by combining functions from other
> organizations to
> >create another entity dnsa?
> As noted above: 1) accountability problem; 2) incentives problem. To
> which we can add: not letting ICANN get too powerful.
> >The proposed Dnsa is potentially a consortium of 1000+ registries and
> how would this work.
> Not that many companies involved. More like a few hundred; lots of
> companies have multiple TLDs. Ownership shares might be based on some
> metric of size, such as names under registration, etc.
> How does GNSO work? How does ccNSO work? How did Intelsat work?
> (consortium of ~200 national telecom operators). How did Nominet work?
> (shared ownership by many registrars) How does IEEE work? (hundreds of
> thousands of members).
> >Is this different from creating another ICANN
> Very different. ICANN is for making policy. It involves representation
> of diverse stakeholders and a complicated process for developing
> consensus on policy and approval by the board. DNSA is for operations.
> Most people I have talked to agree that we need to keep those things
> separate. So, we separate them
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss