This depends on whether there can be adequate accountability mechanism that empowers the policy making body community to be involved in the decision making making process that will affect their respective functions of IANA.I am certainly NOT in favour of this answer being included in the NCSG response. For one thing, I’m not convinced that there is any guarantee that this level of accountability is achievable. Besides, the statement seems a little vague to me. The “policy making body community” includes the ICANN board and staff. Aren’t they the ones who need to be held accountable?
Are you comfortable with ICANN as policy-maker also being the IANA operator without the benefit of external oversight?
More importantly, I am very much in favour of one of the initial principles agreed to by the CWG early in its work - separation of ICANN’s policy development role from the IANA operator functions.
I was never really comfortable with the idea of directly involving the ICANN SOs and ACs in the oversight or decision-making processes of IANA.
Hi,
As I had indicated earlier, I had been collecting responses in a Drive doc:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U72dVBIuwU3eq8K1e3DWstXNZLOCpcB4YFvKmqHCHQ0/edit?usp=sharing
No one has commented there in a few days, though we have seen some +1s on the list for Milton's position
I am copying the NCSG Policy Committee on this asking what they want to do. A few of people have stood up for Milton's responses perhaps with a few quibbles, and he did already offer them as the NCSG positon in the live session. On the other hand a few people have indicated some disagreement with his responses.
While it is late, responses could still be submitted.
avri
Seun Ojedeji,
Federal University Oye-Ekiti
web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
Mobile: +2348035233535
alt email: [log in to unmask]The key to understanding is humility - my view !