[discuss] Testing "structural separation" accountability mechanism (was: Re: [IANAxfer] [ccnso-igrg] Two accountability questions - help pls- Workshop 23 - ICANN accountability

John Curran jcurran at istaff.org
Fri Sep 5 07:39:08 UTC 2014

On Sep 5, 2014, at 9:47 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

> The ultimate form of accountability is when the IANA functions can be taken away from the provider. That is, the contract can be awarded to someone else if ICANN performs poorly, takes ultra vires actions, etc.

Milton - 
 Let's test the usefulness of this mechanism...  If this had been the case, then when over 
 the last decade would have the community moved the IANA functions from ICANN, and
 how would that decision have been made?

 I understand how other mechanisms (e.g. ability to remove a Board member) can be used
 readily used as an accountability mechanism (and don't require major operation changes),
 but if the policy communities had had control of the "structural separation" knob rather than
 NTIA, when and how would it have been used?


Disclaimer: my views alone

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140905/d64f24df/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list