Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review

What we are discussing is whether the existing mechanisms will be sufficient
after the NTIA withdraws from its "stewardship" role, which role included
placing stringent conditions on the way that ICANN performs the IANA
function.

The reality is that NTIA envisages withdrawing.  Whether that is significant
or not appears to be disputed.

Best,
Richard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ianaplan [mailto:ianaplan-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Stephen
> Farrell
> Sent: mardi, 2. septembre 2014 12:53
> To: Miles Fidelman; rhill@hill-a.ch; Brian E Carpenter
> Cc: ianaplan@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review
>
>
>
>
> On 02/09/14 11:44, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> >
> >
> > The whole point of accountability mechanisms, be they in law or contract
> > form, is to address worst case situations.  When things are working,
> > there's little need for such mechanisms.
>
> Sure. But discussing this when such mechanisms do exist already
> (as is the case for protocol parameters) as if those mechanisms
> did not exist, is what I commented upon. That is not considering
> a worst-case scenario, that constitutes ignoring reality.
>
> S.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list
> Ianaplan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan
>