Hi,
Is that 'transition to a "successor
contractor" plan' available to the CWG?
avri
On 17-Dec-14 05:26, Matthew Shears
wrote:
Alan
Section C.7 in the current contract addresses issues of continuity
of operations - particularly C.7.3, according to which ICANN
should have a transition to a "successor
contractor" plan in place at the moment
Matthew
On 12/17/2014 3:38 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
As someone whose ICANN 'job" is
supporting/defending the needs of Internet users, I will point
out that security and stability of the IANA functions is of
paramount importance for the ALAC as well.
I look forward to the seeing how that can be assured in a
potentially disruptive switch of the IANA operator where it may
be that there is no continuity of either staff or systems.
Alan
At 15/12/2014 03:16 PM, Donna Austin wrote:
All
I largely agree with Christopher. I think we are creating
complexity where it does not necessarily need to be, but as we
are here I want to reiterate a few comments I made on the RFP
3 call earlier today, and these comments come from a gTLD
registry operator perspective:
· Operational stability and reliability of the IANA
service is imperative to the business operations of registry
operators and as such this should be a critical consideration
in any discussions.
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship