Re: [Ianaplan] Transition proposal for naming-related functions

[Jefsey <[e-mail]>]

At 15:25 29/04/2015, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>* PTI ownership. If the PTI is formed as an affiliate of ICANN as 
>the CWG proposes, as a legal entity it would be wholly owned by 
>ICANN. Your community may want to consider its view of this whole 
>ownership versus joint ownership involving all or multiple communities.

All what ICANN may propose/investigate is irrelevant to 
internet/catenet users on a worldwide basis and, as for the IETF 
global community of NTIA followers,  execept (after the probable 
various transitions to ITU and Libre) for the US citizens. However, 
for the sake of good mutual inter global community relations and due 
to the traditional trust the world has invested in them for 30 years, 
it might be of interest that the IAB is granted a veto power at PTI - 
without a need for investing money there, since in the considered 
system money is still the metric of power. This would restore some of 
the initial ICANN accountability framework devised by the NTIA and 
accepted by the GAC. It might help some States to better swallow the 
ICANN hi-jack on the IANA.

Best
jfc