[Chapter-delegates] Internet Society Appointments to the NTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group

[Richard Hill]

Dear Evan,

I think that it is important to distiguish two different accountabilities: one is for ICANN's economic regulatory function, in particular the gTLD matters, the other is for the clerical IANA function.

It seems to me that the organizations that rely on the IANA function (registries, RIRs, IAB/IETF) are well positioned to provide the ultimate oversight for the IANA function.

I do agree that the registries/registrars are not the appropriate entities to provide the ultimate oversight for ICANN's economic regulatory function because, as you say, that would put the regulated in charge of the regulator.  My suggestion is that the ultimate oversigh for ICANN's economic regulatory function should be the end-users, that is the registrants of domain names (people/organizations that hold domain name registrations).

Best,
Richard
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org]On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch
  Sent: jeudi, 3. juillet 2014 17:47
  To: Alejandro Pisanty
  Cc: Chapter Delegates; Demi Getschko
  Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet Society Appointments to the NTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group


  On 3 July 2014 05:46, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty at gmail.com> wrote:


    ISOC is the only member of the Coordination Group that is not simultaneously a directly interested party, a "client" of IANA or a structural participant in ICANN.




  FWIW, I would also generally add to that set of characteristics, the people currently being considered to fill the spots on the CG by ICANN At-Large. While coming from a "structural participant in ICANN", the At-Large delegates are also non-conflicted, and seek to protect the interests of those who are neither sellers nor buyers of domains. (Indeed, such perspective of At-Large is mandated in the ICANN bylaws.)  It is no coincidence that so many ISOC chapters are also At-Large Structures.


  The ALAC and ISOC delegates have highly common interest at the CG, and the potential to be an effective coalition. No doubt there will be other, self-interested coalitions with which they will need to contend.


  I have already been hearing from some corners of ICANN a sentiment that oversight of IANA should "naturally" fall to those with whom ICANN has contractual relations. If carried through to its logical conclusion this perspective would, in effect, put the regulated in change of the regulator; it needs to be resisted.


  Indeed, a trusted insider has suggested to me that the reference by some within ICANN to the current situation as "IANA transition" (as opposed to the more accurate "IANA stewardship transition") is deliberate, and an attempt to shift (or at least blur) the focus.


  This will indeed be an interesting environment.


  - Evan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20140703/cace07e2/attachment.htm>