<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/02/2015 3:15 AM, Milton L Mueller
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1859925413;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1701537886 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear members:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The CWG on IANA transition is going to
collecting community feedback on the IANA transition this
week. This exercise is very important because it will
influence the CWG’s development of a proposal.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have gone through the 9 questions they
prepared and answered them, you all may be interested in my
answers. Most of these answers will probably be
uncontroversial on this list, but there may be some room for
debate so I would like to get your feedback on my proposed
answers<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Do you believe that the
transition from the NTIA should happen (Please provide the
reasons for your answer)?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes. Unilateral US government control of
the IANA functions contract is not compatible with the
multistakeholder model</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
agree<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">2.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Are you comfortable with ICANN
as policy-maker also being the IANA operator without the
benefit of external oversight?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">No. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
A No is the best answer. We should not qualify this no IMO
(re:Seun's comment)<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">3.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Should registries, as the
primary customers of the IANA functions, have more of a say as
to which transition proposal is acceptable?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The NTIA has made it clear that all major
stakeholder groups, including registries, need to accept the
transition proposal. Registries should have an influential
role in any oversight mechanisms of the naming-related IANA
functions, but need not have a privileged role in the
selection of proposals. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
good answer<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">4.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->What does functional separation
of IANA from ICANN mean to you? (this is not referring to
having another operator than ICANN performing the IANA
functions but rather the internal separation between ICANN and
IANA in the context where ICANN is the IANA operator) <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Functional separation means that IANA is a
department of ICANN under the same management as the rest of
ICANN and without a clearly separated budget or mission.
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Functional separation in telecom usually means that certain layers
on certain facilities will be shared, whereas structural separation
entails separately owned facilities. Functional separation needs a
regulating body superseding it, otherwise it's just rhetorical
separation. Please verify that the academic answer above "functional
sep is this and that" doesn't kind of condone a rhetorical
separation.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">5.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Do you believe the IANA function
is adequately separated from ICANN under the current
arrangements (internal separation)?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">No. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
agree<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">6.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->In considering the key factors
(such as security and stability, ease of separating the IANA
function from ICANN, quality of services, accountability
mechanisms etc.) for evaluating the various transition
proposals what importance would you give to the ability to
separate IANA from ICANN (separability) vs. the other factors?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Very high importance, because separability
will have major beneficial effects on all the other factors,
such as accountability, quality of service, security and
stability. Separability increases the leverage of the
customers of IANA over performance, security and stability.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
good answer<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">7. Given the IANA functions
could be separated from ICANN do you believe it would be
important for the community to obtain from ICANN on an annual
basis the costs for operating IANA including overhead costs?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes, very important.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">o Would it be important to separate out the
costs associated with address and protocol functions?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Less so than the IANA department as a whole</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Both are important. They cannot be a substitute for effective
separation.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">8. Could there be unforeseen
impacts relative to selecting a new operator for the IANA
functions vs the ICANN policy role (should ICANN determine
that there will be another round of new gTLDs, how could it
ensure that the new operator would accept this)?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">No, a new operator could be contractually
bound to accept changes from ICANN that were the product of
legitimate policy making processes.
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
good answer<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">9. Are there other transition
models which the CWG should be exploring?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes, the new structural separation model
proposed by Brenden Kuerbis, Matt Shears, and Avri Doria</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I'd be interested in seeing this proposal. I guess I may have been
to busy to parse this list correctly of late.<br>
<br>
<br>
Nicolas<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6905de5a0aef4be8817c5647c0da6f01@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Milton L Mueller<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Syracuse University School of Information
Studies<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/">http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Internet Governance Project<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://internetgovernance.org/">http://internetgovernance.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>