Dear Co-Chairs

Our chater relating to work Stream 1 indicates / referred to the  accountability  which must be in place or committed before transition takes place.

In CCWG ,to gether with / inconsultation with CWG we have addressed accountability regarding Naming Community.

However, regardinfg Parameters / Protocol and Numbers accountability nothing is mentioned.

Accoring to IETF and CRISP they do not need any accountability ? WHICHIDOUBT

I draw your attention to the PART OF THE  latest views of IETF regarding transition :

Quote

" The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) has
decided to use an update of our yearly IETF-ICANN Service Level
Agreement (SLA) as the mechanism for this updated
agreement. They have drafted the update and from our
perspective it could be immediately executed. Once the updated
agreement is in place, the transition would be substantially
complete, with only the NTIA contract lapse or termination
as a final step."

Unqiote

It seems to me neither IETF not RIREs wish to have any commuinity empowerment in their activities .Please look at their proposals to ICG dated 06 and 15 January 2015

On the other hand   Parameters / Protocol and Numbers like Naming require accountability from those implementing them

My question to Lega Adviser is ,reading the proposals from IETF and RIREs to ICG, do they need to be accountable to the community or nor.We need to have a clwear advice on this

Regards

KAVOUSS