[Internetgovtech] Transition to the web

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Tue, 08 July 2014 22:50 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F6F1A0175 for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:50:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.752
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.752 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u--IjnA9tRGX for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:50:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C3B1A016C for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:50:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.142.221]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s68MocTf027409 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:50:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1404859852; x=1404946252; bh=wAzYSA/MIJ0qNWetajsYfzNndzmbgZ6jIkzCwLZaluY=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=4eIsxRcC/9zTCadQJNRKS76Eo68Ig0mO1NoPSBP8Ux+ivNIZMSVeZ0JXgZzEw5rT7 WkdoPsxLJk036rmB7AlkfXydiMV2W69SyBsNJyBqCxkdJA777SxIX4e+q660Ge4wyX yUIwgxY9W5WDVafyDlADkgYB3IgVTetp+gxfb66Q=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1404859852; x=1404946252; i=@elandsys.com; bh=wAzYSA/MIJ0qNWetajsYfzNndzmbgZ6jIkzCwLZaluY=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=RSjMXXoMVj2QuOkrcdanJ/gtkPGtlCgfov9SpjsHRB3GTIfQhIwmljjVDSOCwydWE B62zMJQlAUJPMSXzaSkiZe/24a7P1i/qlmA93Zt8pAptR9ic191H6FBU88MmLwWBDp PVW5WKs6pN3kiMN8o1qmw/CYo7qzou5QZEwSYNJY=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140708142055.0d5fbb78@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 15:01:48 -0700
To: internetgovtech@iab.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/internetgovtech/Gk-7tJ970xl7Oz8Fo0mDEI9cJnY
Subject: [Internetgovtech] Transition to the web
X-BeenThere: internetgovtech@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Governance and IETF technical work <internetgovtech.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.iab.org/mail-archive/web/internetgovtech/>
List-Post: <mailto:internetgovtech@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 22:50:55 -0000

Hello,

There is a message at 
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/2014/001160.html from 
"ICANN staff".  It looks like nobody from ICANN took responsibility 
for the decision to transition the IANA Transition discussion to the 
web.  It is odd to see that in a message which mentions transparency.

Here are some of ICANN conditions to participation:

   "ICANN has the right (though not the obligation) to, in ICANN Forum's sole
    discretion (i) refuse or remove any content that, in ICANN Forum's
    reasonable opinion, violates any ICANN policy or procedure or is in any
    way harmful or objectionable, or (ii) terminate or deny access to and
    use of the Website to any individual or entity for any reason, in
    ICANN's sole discretion."

I note the "sole discretion" in the above.

   "Adhere to ICANN's conflict of interest policies"

There isn't any information about those policies.

   "Conduct themselves in accordance with ICANN policies."

There isn't any information about those policies.

   "Protect the organization's assets and ensure their efficient and 
effective use."

The participant has to protect ICANN's assets.  In simple terms 
participants should work towards ensuring ICANN's interest.

The last entity that attempted a transition of discussions to the web 
found out that it was a failure.  It looks like ICANN staff has not 
learned anything from that.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy