[discuss] Two accountability questions - help pls- Workshop 23 - ICANN accountability

[Jordan Carter]

Hi Brian,

On Tuesday, 2 September 2014, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Jordan,
>
> > On the substance: I agree with you that it's like an iceberg. But one
> > of the facts on the ground is that two of the three customer groups of
> > the IANA functions have elegant and well-considered external policy
> > decision processes.
> >
> > Among the third customer group, the naming folks, we have the country
> > code names. I posit that this is the most politically (in the big P,
> > governments are interested sense) part of the role, and we are at the
> > most mercy of having decent accountability arrangements in place with
> > the IANA operator, for a couple of reasons:
> >
> > * we don't accept that ICANN has any right to be making policy on
> > ccTLD matters, except to endorse or not endorse decisions that we
> > make, BUT
> >
> > * the only forum we have for making those decisions is within ICANN,
> > which is also the IANA operator.
>
> What is preventing you from creating an independent forum?
> (I am not being rhetorical, it's a genuine question.)
> If an independent forum existed, it could negotiate with
> ICANN as others have done.
>
>
I agree that is an option, but the problem I see with it relates to the
fact that ICANN already gathers all the key players with an interest in
ccTLD matters (which is a broader set than those that make policy on these,
per se): governments, ccTLD operators, users, registrars to some degree.

It would seem unlikely that you'd be able to get buy-in for "another ICANN"
to be created.

The smaller and simpler conceptual divide is to put the IANA functions
operator in a different structure, but views on that are to say the least
divided.

cheers,
Jordan





>

-- 
-- 
Jordan Carter
Chief Executive, InternetNZ

+64-21-442-649 | jordan at internetnz.net.nz

Sent on the run, apologies for brevity
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140902/2403ef57/attachment.html>