[At-Large] Fwd: [APAC-Discuss] Internet Governance Webinar Conversation Opportunity With ICANN Senior Executives
dogwallah at gmail.com
Thu Nov 7 13:51:43 UTC 2013
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
> These are my questions for Fadi, Theresa et al.
> 1)The meeting that ICANN had with Brazil was designed to discuss the Summit in Rio, in the CEO's mind when he was talking about the Internationalisation of ICANN did he mean:
> a) change of oversight from the US, via IANA, DoC to one under a global framework (treaty or otherwise - of more pluralism in architecture);
I can't speak for ICANN of course, but I do not see the need for a
treaty or other "multilateral" mechanism.
There are 2 things that are upsetting folks;
1) the NTIA role in authorising changes to the root.
This one is relatively easy to solve, and to be blunt the GAC already
has more "power" to say what goes in the root than NTIA. The GAC can
give "advice" that says in essence "thou shalt not put Amazon in the
rootzone" for example, but NTIA can only say "yes, IANA followed their
own procedures in making this rootzone change".
The ICANN BoD already passes resolutions telling IANA to delegate (or
re-delegate) certain strings, so I think they could easily take on the
role of NTIA in ratifying whether or not IANA followed their own
processes. After all, the ICANN BoD ratifies global IP addressing
policy in the same way (did the ASO follow their own process or not).
2) the fact that ICANN has a contract to run IANA from the USG. This
one is harder of course due to political issues in the USA. It may be
easier after the NTIA role in re: rootzone changes is shifted tot the
ICANN BoD however.
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
More information about the At-Large