[Internetgovtech] Costs (Was: Re: Transition to the web)

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

> No. The transition stuff is trying to figure out how to not disrupt the way the Internet works while removing NTIA from the functions it provides. As far as I can tell, those functions are:
> 
> 1) ensure ICANN has followed its own processes in validating changes to the root zone;
> 2) provide a mechanism by which ICANN can be held accountable for its actions;
> 3) facilitate obtaining exemptions for dealing with entities under sanction in order to provide registry services; and
> 4) reduce the risk ICANN will be subject to inappropriate legal, economic, and/or geo-political pressure.
> 
> (I've been told #3 isn't that big an issue anymore, but don't have direct knowledge -- haven't been at ICANN for 4 years now and I'm told things have changed)
> 
> However, instead of dealing with that issue, my impression is that people on this list and elsewhere have been far more focused on whether or not a mailing list is used for communication instead of a web-based forum and how that demonstrates ICANN is incompetent, inappropriate, and/or evil.

The above list is indeed good.

>> The question of who pays for the IETF-related IANA functions seems to be one of those details.
> 
> 
> That is not a function that is currently performed by NTIA. Section 4.4 and 4.5 of RFC 2860 is explicit that ICANN may not charge for IETF-related IANA services. The existing arrangement appears to be working and I have heard no one (other than perhaps yourself) arguing that this is an issue that needs to be addressed as part of the transition. In particular, neither the chair of the IETF, the chair of the IAB, nor ICANN's CEO have suggested that the MOU needs to be revised/terminated to allow ICANN to charge for IETF-related registry services. I'm unclear why you think it is an issue.

For what it is worth, David is right above. I would like to suggest that focusing on the costs is the wrong way to approach the issue. Lets first ensure that we have a system that performs the right functions, and I think we are already close to that. From the 10.000 ft perspective the costs are not such a big issue that they should drive the transition in any particular direction. At least not for protocol parameters.

Jari