[discuss] Roadmap for globalizing IANA

[James Seng]

Hi Milton,

A technical function that can be perform by 1-man would become political if
you attached a 12m tag to it.

So I would hestitate to talk about cost at this moment.

-James Seng


On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>  Janis
>
> We estimate that the combination of annual expenses from ICANN and
> Verisign for those functions is now about $8-10 million. However, DNSA does
> not take over all the IANA functions, so expenses may be less. We proposed
> an initial $12 million grant from ICANN to get things started and then
> continued funding of DNSA via self-imposed contributions by the DNSA
> members. In other words, the registries themselves pay for the DNS parts of
> the IANA functions. As the industry generates more than $7 billion in
> revenue annually, we are talking about 1% or less of their revenue to
> support the DNSA functions.
>
> --MM
>
>
>
> *From:* Janis Karklins [mailto:karklinsj at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 4, 2014 8:03 AM
>
> *To:* Milton L Mueller
> *Cc:* discuss at 1net.org
> *Subject:* RE: [discuss] Roadmap for globalizing IANA
>
>
>
> Milton,
>
>
>
> How your proposed DNSA would be funded? Could you elaborate a bit on that?
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
> JK
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org<discuss-bounces at 1net.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Milton L Mueller
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 04, 2014 4:44 AM
> *To:* Nii Narku Quaynor
> *Cc:* discuss at 1net.org
> *Subject:* Re: [discuss] Roadmap for globalizing IANA
>
>
>
> 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
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
-James Seng
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140304/8cc7eea8/attachment.html>