Good catch, Seun. There is no doubt in my mind that PTI was defined as the successor to all the IANA functions. Regards CW On 23 Apr 2016, at 21:27, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,
From my understanding of PTI was that it's going to be the new IANA that will serve the 3OCs (even though numbers and protocols contracts with ICANN).
If my high-level understanding above is right, then i think there may be something wrong in the fy17 draft budget which has just been brought to my attention.
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-fy17-05ma...
Page 25 item 4 says the following:
PTI- New legal entity, destined to host activities and costs of the IANA functions in service of the *Names community*
Then page 27 seem to imply that PTI will indeed serve the names alone. At the moment, I have not considered the application of this new arrangement and unless I am missing something, I don't think this was what was proposed.
Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship