Hi,

On 30-Nov-14 04:18, Milton L Mueller wrote:

The PRT is temporary and multistakeholder and the contract Co. does what the PRT tells it to do at a particular time, that is my understanding. I think it seems like a good way to avoid some of the potential problems associated with replacing the NTIA. Others can speak up if they think I got it wrong. How this works legally? I will let the lawyers explain.

I agree, and that is the point I was making in my Trust-like structure. In my view this was a small legal entity empowered with making, breaking and administering a contract with the IANA function contractor at the direction of the PRT.

It is what enables the PRT to be intermittent, it gives its directions to the Administrator employed by the Contract Co. and then goes to sleep until the next time it is needed to either deal with an emergency, e.g. an escalated emergency issue from the CSC, or for its appointed time for a [yeary] review of IANA performance, or its [N yearly] RFP and (re) assignment of the contract for the IANA function.

As I indicated, if we decide that a contnuing clerical Root Zone Management Process Administrator is needed (i think that may be a good idea) it can perform this as well, as it is a rule driven task and requires no policy.

I envision it as somewhat similar to the function defined in IETF BCP 101 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp101> (which may provide an example of existing langauge for the lawyers/diplomats among us) to the IETF Adminsitrative Director (IAD) who responds to the directions of the IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC), which is analoguous to the PRT. Though the Contract Co, would not have as many powers as the IAD does as the IANA administrative function is not as broad as the administrative function of the IETF.

From BCP 101

 The IAD is responsible for working with the IAOC and others to
   understand the administrative requirements of the IETF, and for
   managing the IASA to meet those needs.  This includes determining the
   structure of the IASA effort, establishing an operating budget,
   negotiating contracts with service providers, managing the business
   relationship with those providers, and establishing mechanisms to
   track their performance.  The IAD may also manage other contractors
   or ISOC employees (such as support staff) as necessary, when such
   contractors or employees are engaged in IASA-related work.

In this replace:

IETF with IANA contract
IASA with the nameless "4 new entities to replace the current NTIA arrangements."
IAD with Contract Co.
IAOC with PRT
ISOC with IANA Contractor (in the initial case, ICANN)
Service providers may include things like the company hired to do audits &c or arrange the meeting of the PRT and CSC.

Note, this is an analogy, I am not suggesting a word for word cut and paste, meant to illustrate the scope and structure I had in mind. One major difference is that in the IASA, the contracts are entered into by ISOC, whereas in the IANA transition solution they would be entered into by Contract Co, a legal entity in its own right that serves the interests of the Internet community, and holds the contract with IANA in 'trust', i.e. "for the benefit of," for that community.

avri