<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Milton L Mueller <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">mueller@syr.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US">
<div>
<br><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span><span class=""></span><span class="">
</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">- Through the various policy processes (which i think you also agreed to in your mail)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">Policy processes cannot take IANA away from ICANN nor can they provide appropriate levels of oversight over policy implementation. Indeed, the policy process
is entirely dependent on ICANN to implement it, and if ICANN ignores the PDP and implements what it prefers (which has happened a few times) we have no recourse.
</span>
<span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span>
<span class="">
</span><p></p></div></div></blockquote><br><div></div>Okay i agree with this view to some extent, however i think if its clearly defined that IANA implementation is going to be solely by policy, that alone will serve some level of oversight. I am thinking aloud and wondering why this has been so well practised within the RIR without any major alarm. I think there are 2 reasons for this:<br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">- The IP resource owner/requester serves an extent of accountability by ensuring that his/her resource is processed by staff based on the existing policies. When such does not happen, there are clear means by which a customer raises alarm<br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">- The board of directors (BOD) understands that policies are defacto! Although before any policy proposal gets implemented, it needs to pass through board but they don't get changed, though it could be pending ratification which also has a clear timeline on maximum length of time such proposal could last on board's table. I think the board has respected the community developed process because they understand that if they do something extremely contrary to what the community has said, they could be kicked out of their positions by its members (yes valid for my region's RIR, don't know about others). <br><br>I think the difference between the RIR and that of ICANN is largely related to the overall power BOD has. So there has to be a way of introducing some level of BOD accountability to the community and if it means introducing memberships so be it. (afterall within RIR, there is the larger community and members who are also part of the community that have the right to hold the board accountable). I generally don't see why a staff will refuse not to implement according to policy unless its receiving strong backing from the BOD...overall, the BOD may be the fish-bone that needs to be worked on in ICANN. <br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"></span> </p></div></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">They would find away around it: by chagning their service provider, i.e. by taking away the contract. I don’t understand why you
resist this simple idea.</span><span class=""></span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>By finding a way around it....i mean they may form another IANA which ofcourse does not necessarily mean taking away any contract. Its rather taking their service elsewhere, i believe this instinct should be clearly known to ICANN.<br><br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"> ......<span class="im">Would you not also agree then that the current separation can be maintained even without the contract?</span></p></div></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">No, I would not agree with that last part. How can any reasonable person agree with that? If there is no contractual obligation to maintain the separation, then the separation will
collapse as soon as it is in ICANN’s organizational self-interest to do so. </span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You are right, i figured my statement above may not be explicit enough. However i think it can be maintained especially if the 3 major communities (the number, Names and protocol ) wants to do so through agreements (which is not necessarily contract). Maybe legal folks could wage in here.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">
</span>
<span class="">
</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">.............So i think going out of this contracting processes should indeed be the next phase in the growing process of ICANN and it absolutely
may not make any much difference if it leaves one contracting regime to enter into another.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:rgb(31,73,125)">When people build things, they can make mistakes. ICANN has inadequate accountability to be given untrammelled control of the DNS root and number spaces.
</span>
<p></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I very much agree that there is quite a lot of community confidence that needs to be achieved in all these, and i am not in anyway saying all is well with ICANN (no reasonable person will say that). I just don't think dissecting IANA or creating another contractual regime is entirely helpful in fixing any problem that ICANN has. If by 2015 the community cannot find a way to make ICANN accountable other than through putting it under another contracting body, then IMHO it may more useful to maintain the status-quo until we sense ICANN has fully grown.<br></div></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Like its been said in previous interaction; the devil you know (NTIA/US) may be better that the angel you are yet to know. <br><br>I am open to ways by which we can make ICANN continue to earn IANA functions without necessarily creating a new oversight body that will itself require another oversight and cause an endless loop. <br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Thanks<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Regards<br clear="all"></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr">------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><font color="#888888"><blockquote style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex;font-family:garamond,serif">
<i><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Seun Ojedeji,<br style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Federal University Oye-Ekiti<br style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">web: </span><a href="http://www.fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">http://www.fuoye.edu.ng</a><br>
<span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Mobile: <a value="+2348035233535">+2348035233535</a></span><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"></span><br></i><i><span style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">alt email:<a href="http://goog_1872880453" target="_blank"> </a><a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng</a></span></i><br><br><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The key to understanding is humility - my view !<br></blockquote></blockquote></font><br></div>
</div></div>