Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 17 Nov 2014 09:14:00 -0500 |
Content-Type: | multipart/alternative |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Thanks Mamadou, Ripe 69 is a good read! Here is a quick take on two
issues: the IANA transition and ICANN's accountability (and transparency)
Background: The RIPE 69 meetings just concluded in London. The RIPE
meeting are where [mainly] Internet Service Providers (ISPs), network
operators and [also] other interested parties gather to discuss issues
of interest to the Internet community. Report at:
https://centr.org/system/files/share/centr-report-ripe69-20141114_0.pdf
/Comments: //
//
//Shortly after the NTIA IANA transition announcement there were two
brief discussions about the timeline for the transition and the
relationship between accountability and transparency in a transition
multistakeholder model and accountability and transition in ICANN's
multistakeholder model. Those suggesting that the time line was too
short were sidetracked by accusations that they were anti-transition.
The issue of a linkage between the two accountability and transparency
issues was downplayed. ////
////
//Now, half a year later, both time line and the accountability and
transparency issues are resurfacing. The RIPE 69 Report out of London
this month cites ARIN CEO John Curran as saying that all accountability
issues of ICANN had to be solved before making the step, and the Report
argues that this issue "certainly is the killer for a quick transition".
This is contained in a section of the report discussing the issue of how
to make ICANN more accountable and transparent, and discussed making
ICANN more of a membership lead organization. The issue of a process for
more ICANN accountability continues to be the elephant in the room, and
current efforts to deal with that issue look overly constrained and
circumscribed.////
///
Sam Lanfranco,
Chair, NPOC Policy Committee
|
|
|