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

John Curran jcurran at istaff.org
Thu Sep 4 09:42:09 UTC 2014

On Sep 4, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz> wrote:

> It does, but only if you presume that each of the served communities has a clear
> voice and can meaningfully contract for its portion of the IANA services.  Is this
> your understanding as well?
> Well, I rather thought that ICANN itself might be able to do that for names. But I know that might be a rather heroic assumption for a range of reasons.

If that makes the DNS community comfortable, then that's fine.  Mind you, that assures
that any external IANA operator follows ICANN's direction and is an exact replication of
the current system minus NTIA.

> Unless the names stakeholders have organized to the extent of being able to enter 
> into an agreement for IANA services, I am uncertain how moving the IANA provides 
> any additional accountability.
> Because it separates the ICANN Board from having two roles: of accepting / making names policy, and governing the IANA functions operator.

Please elaborate.

>  I think you'll find that IANA has been following directions accurately, but there's quite a
> bit of "DNS policy implementation" which takes place within ICANN and that sometimes
> heads in unexpected directions.  If this is the case, focusing on IANA accountability is
> missing the root cause of the angst that is being experienced, yes?
> I think the root cause of the angst is ICANN's culture, and its failure to conceive of its role as primarily serving the community.
> That cultural failure leads to the sorts of staff and Board decisions that have eroded trust between ICANN-the-organisation and the ICANN community.

Again, you are referring to decisions that are being made within _ICANN_, and hence are
unaffected by any move of the IANA external to ICANN (particularly if ICANN is the one who
contracts with the IANA operator for the DNS IANA registry maintenance, as you propose

I actually don't know if moving the IANA outside of ICANN is a good idea or not; there are
certain stability issues that weigh heavily, but we also have existence proof that such teams
can be transitioned from their parent organizations successfully.  My main point is that moving
IANA (or not) doesn't actually have any meaningful impact on the ICANN accountability, which 
appears (from those on the sidelines such as myself) to be the DNS communities principal 
source of angst.


Disclaimer: my views alone.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140904/48e16393/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list