Sorry if its not IANA functions then what else is there to transition?

 

Again if i may ask, could you tell me how else NTIA would have handled oversight apart from contracting? just like the RIR and IETF communities, is there any other way ICANN could operate their related functions without an agreement(SLA)? because these organisations are external and independent of ICANN. So IMO if we really want to continue contracting, then we need another organisation like NTIA (in its full independent of the IANA operator) to get the job done effectively. However, because this shoe is now to be worn by "multistakeholder" then it just makes practical sense to integrate oversight (accountability) into the existing organisation. Someone wrote a blog and defined a bylaw (paraphrased) as the document that indicate how an organisation operate while a contract is the one that tells how an organisation should execute a specific set of tasks. However the person failed to indicate that any entity that would exercise the latter would exhibit absolute control both in resource and independence from the operator. In a situation where that is not possible, the former becomes a realistic target solution to concentrate on.

There has been questions/comments about how contract co / MRT(in its current overreaching responsibilities) will be accountable and i have seen some response still point to the bylaw of the contract co as a possible avenue to restrict things. Why then do we find it difficult to have such thinking on the ICANN bylaw? someone said ICANN bylaw can be changed by the board, and how about contract co bylaw? The earlier we face the reality of multiple loop holes we are about to create (in addition to existing ones) with the current CWG proposal the better for us all in this process.

+1

Thanks