[ALAC] IANA Transition

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Thu Sep 29 16:15:23 UTC 2016


Evan,

I don't see that one precludes the other. Yes, it 
is a relief that the initiative to block the 
transition through the budget proposal seems to 
have died and I am grateful. But in my mind, the 
real celebration is the Stewardship transition 
(not only to ICANN for the names function but to 
the numbers and protocol communities for their aspects of it).

This transition was envisioned (albeit perhaps 
not in the exact form it has taken) quite a 
number of years ago, and it appears that it will 
now happen. Finally. That *is* a cause for celebration in my mind.

I and others have spent a very large part of the 
last two years with this as the target, in many 
cases at large expense to ones personal and even 
professional life. To have seen that dissolve 
into completely wasted time would have been very 
regretful, at least to me. And yes, some of the 
accountability work would still bear fruit, but my statement stands.

That being said, as with every momentous occasion 
be it a significant life event or milestone, it 
is proper to look at how we got here and what we 
have learned. If ICANN had followed different 
paths (as, in some cases, both you and I 
advocated), ICANN would have been deemed more 
trustworthy and the entire Names Stewardship 
Transition Proposal would have been *FAR* easier. 
And simpler. And faster. And cheaper.

If ICANN had been as open and transparent as it 
should have been (in my not at all humble 
opinion), we might still have had some 
accountability work to do, but that too would have been much simpler.

Would that have eliminated that US-centric effort 
to "keep the Internet American" with all of its 
grossly inaccurate rhetoric? Not a chance! But we 
would have had a better defence.

So yes, we have blown a lot over the last nearly 
two decades. And we need to learn from that. But 
a bit of a party and self-congratulations for the 
work we did do and pleasure over the fact that 
the US government will be out of this aspect of 
Internet governance is not out of order either.

Alan

At 29/09/2016 09:14 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

>As I said in the Skype chat:
>
>This news is not cause for celebration. It is a 
>moment to pause and reflect on a completely 
>preventable incident that, thanks to a 
>combination of timing, frantic activity and a 
>good dose of pure luck, avoided rejection of 
>years of hard work and a massive humiliation.
>
>There WILL be other challenges. The transition 
>brings benefits, but it also eliminates any 
>formal state's documented commitment to ICANN's 
>legitimacy. So long as it is not a treaty 
>organisation its activity will be subject to 
>ongoing scrutiny both global and local. And it 
>is a grotesque mistake to interpret 
>congressional bypass of Ted Cruz's crass 
>political initiative as endorsement of ICANN.
>
>I see no evidence that the broader support 
>community has learned anything from this 
>experience, meaning that it remains unprepared 
>for future, more sophisticated attacks.
>
>ICANN remains no less out of touch with the 
>public it claims to serve, than it was before 
>Ted Cruz learned about it. This incident was not 
>only a brush with catastrophe, it was a wakeup call.
>
>- Evan (via mobile)
>On 29 Sep 2016, at 07:02, "León Felipe Sánchez 
>Ambía" <<mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> wrote:
>This is great news Alan. We're witnessing 
>history. Congratulations to all who have made it possible.
>
>Saludos,
>
>
>León
>
>El sep. 29, 2016, a las 4:38 AM, Javier Rua 
><<mailto:javrua at gmail.com>javrua at gmail.com> escribió:
>
>>Great News!
>>
>>Javier Rúa-Jovet
>>
>>+1-787-396-6511
>>@javrua
>><http://linkedin.com/javrua>linkedin.com/javrua
>>
>>>On Sep 28, 2016, at 11:48 PM, Alan Greenberg 
>>><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>According to reports, both the US House of 
>>>Representatives and Senate have passed the 
>>>Continuing Resolution funding the US 
>>>government for the period starting October 1 
>>>through early December WITHOUT any rider restricting the IANA transition.
>>>
>>>The implication is that the IANA Contract with 
>>>the NTIA will lapse, the new ICANN Bylaws will 
>>>be in effect and the stewardship transition will be a done-deal.
>>>
>>>Alan
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>ALAC mailing list
>>><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>>>
>>>At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>>ALAC Working Wiki: 
>>><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>>_______________________________________________
>>ALAC mailing list
>><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>>
>>At-Large Online:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20160929/79e41fd5/attachment.html>


More information about the ALAC mailing list