My answers to the CWG-IANA questions

[Norbert Klein]

Hi Milton and all on the NCSG-DISCUSS list,

I agree with the text from Milton, including the wording as it is. I am
open for clarifying re-wordings, but not with softening the statements.


Norbert Klein
Cambodia



On 02/10/2015 03:15 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> Dear members:
>
> 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.
>
> 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
>
>  
>
> 1.      Do you believe that the transition from the NTIA should happen
> (Please provide the reasons for your answer)?
>
> Yes. Unilateral US government control of the IANA functions contract
> is not compatible with the multistakeholder model
>
>  
>
> 2.      Are you comfortable with ICANN as policy-maker also being the
> IANA operator without the benefit of external oversight?
>
> No.
>
>  
>
> 3.      Should registries, as the primary customers of the IANA
> functions, have more of a say as to which transition proposal is
> acceptable?
>
> 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.
>
>  
>
> 4.      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)
>
> 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.
>
>  
>
> 5.      Do you believe the IANA function is adequately separated from
> ICANN under the current arrangements (internal separation)?
>
> No.
>
>  
>
> 6.      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?
>
> 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.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> 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?
>
>  
>
> Yes, very important.
>
> o Would it be important to separate out the costs associated with
> address and protocol functions?
>
>  
>
> Less so than the IANA department as a whole
>
>  
>
> 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)?
>
>  
>
> No, a new operator could be contractually bound to accept changes from
> ICANN that were the product of legitimate policy making processes.
>
>  
>
> 9.            Are there other transition models which the CWG should
> be exploring?
>
>  
>
> Yes, the new structural separation model proposed by Brenden Kuerbis,
> Matt Shears, and Avri Doria
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Milton L Mueller
>
> Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
>
> Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>
> http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
>
> Internet Governance Project
>
> http://internetgovernance.org <http://internetgovernance.org/>
>
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20150210/540d9ee4/attachment.htm>