hi, On 22-May-15 18:46, Milton L Mueller wrote:
I think that the difference is that registries interact directly with IANA to make changes in the root and it is the responce to these changes that we are measuring wrt the SLEs. Exactly. And let me agree with Suzanne's careful deconstruction of direct vs. indirect. Registries are making entries in the root zone, registrants are using those entries.
As i noted, the SLE are the reason for it being reasonable for the CSC, which concerns itself with SLE for being Registry heavy with a few Liaison. It is not a matter of being a so-called direct customer, it is a matter of managing to a SLE. As for Suzanne's deconstruction, It was a good explanation, but I do not agree with the use of direct versus indirect. they do have a different perspectives, but I still see both of that as just customers of a different type. My issue is with the multistakeholder nature of the IANA Function Review and the Separation Cross Community Working Group and the PTI Board*, where it has nothing to do with being a direct customer or not. At that level they are both customers, customers of a different type - one makes entries and one uses entries - but both customers. It is in these situations where I see no reason to give the Registries disproportionate representation. avri * On the PTI Board, I believe it should be minimal, so instead of having a balanced multstakeholder set of individuals, it should have a majority of representatives (s)elected by a multistakeholder modality. e.g 1 ICANN Staff, 1 PTI Staff, 3 selected by ICANN Nomcom. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com