Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations. US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014 Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account... I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context … regards Robert
Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me. Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine. Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place. A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them. At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things: * Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/ * Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/) * Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/ * A rider in the new funding bill ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr... ) Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking. So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan. ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of... ) I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive. It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist. Hope that is helpful. Kieren On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org> wrote:
Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations.
US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014
Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account...
I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context …
regards
Robert
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Kieren McCarthy Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM To: Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me. Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine. Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place. A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them. At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things: * Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/ * Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/) * Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/ * A rider in the new funding bill (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr...) Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking. So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of...) I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive. It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist. Hope that is helpful. Kieren On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org<mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote: Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations. US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014 Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account... I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context … regards Robert _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
I think Phil's point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn't mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM To: Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Kieren McCarthy Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM To: Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me. Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine. Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place. A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them. At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things: * Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/ * Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/) * Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/ * A rider in the new funding bill (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr...) Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking. So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of...) I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive. It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist. Hope that is helpful. Kieren On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org<mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote: Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations. US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014 Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account... I know Kieren is on this list, so I'm hoping he might provide additional context ... regards Robert _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Well you both follow Washington closer than I do but I have to say I'm not seeing or hearing it myself. Kieren On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
I think Phil’s point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn’t mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism.
Chuck
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Phil Corwin *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM *To:* Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra
*Cc:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
*From: *Kieren McCarthy
*Sent: *Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM
*To: *Robert Guerra
*Cc: *cwg-stewardship@icann.org
*Subject: *Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me.
Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine.
Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place.
A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them.
At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things:
* Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/
* Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/)
* Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/
* A rider in the new funding bill ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr... )
Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking.
So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan.
( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of... )
I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive.
It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist.
Hope that is helpful.
Kieren
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org> wrote:
Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations.
US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014
Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account...
I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context …
regards
Robert
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Phil is closer to it than I am. Most of my info is third hand but from sources I respect. Chuck From: Kieren McCarthy [mailto:kieren@kierenmccarthy.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:27 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: Phil Corwin; Robert Guerra; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Well you both follow Washington closer than I do but I have to say I'm not seeing or hearing it myself. Kieren On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com<mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote: I think Phil’s point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn’t mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM To: Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597<tel:202-559-8597>/Direct 202-559-8750<tel:202-559-8750>/Fax 202-255-6172<tel:202-255-6172>/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Kieren McCarthy Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM To: Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me. Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine. Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place. A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them. At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things: * Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/ * Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/) * Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/ * A rider in the new funding bill (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr...) Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking. So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of...) I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive. It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist. Hope that is helpful. Kieren On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org<mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote: Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations. US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014 Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account... I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context … regards Robert _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
May be a difference in perception. In this town long enough and what seems hyperpartisan to outsiders is just ordinary politics to the locals. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Kieren McCarthy Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:27 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: Phil Corwin; Robert Guerra; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Well you both follow Washington closer than I do but I have to say I'm not seeing or hearing it myself. Kieren On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com<mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote: I think Phil’s point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn’t mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM To: Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597<tel:202-559-8597>/Direct 202-559-8750<tel:202-559-8750>/Fax 202-255-6172<tel:202-255-6172>/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Kieren McCarthy Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM To: Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me. Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine. Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place. A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them. At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things: * Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/ * Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/) * Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/ * A rider in the new funding bill (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr...) Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking. So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of...) I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive. It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist. Hope that is helpful. Kieren On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org<mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote: Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations. US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014 Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account... I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context … regards Robert _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date. ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
I agree that there’s a difference between how the congress is perceived outside of Washington and what the reality is .. For me, it’s perhaps a bit too early to tell with certainty how things will “play out”. For that, I’m waiting to get a sense of the “sense” of congress when the new session starts up in January. Robert
On Dec 10, 2014, at 4:38 PM, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com> wrote:
May be a difference in perception. In this town long enough and what seems hyperpartisan to outsiders is just ordinary politics to the locals.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Kieren McCarthy Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:27 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: Phil Corwin; Robert Guerra; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Well you both follow Washington closer than I do but I have to say I'm not seeing or hearing it myself.
Kieren
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com <mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote: I think Phil’s point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn’t mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism.
Chuck
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM To: Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra
Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597 <tel:202-559-8597>/Direct 202-559-8750 <tel:202-559-8750>/Fax 202-255-6172 <tel:202-255-6172>/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
From: Kieren McCarthy
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM
To: Robert Guerra
Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me.
Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine.
Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place.
A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them.
At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things:
* Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/ <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/> * Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/ <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/>)
* Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/ <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/> * A rider in the new funding bill (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr... <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr...>)
Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking.
So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan.
(http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of... <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of...>)
I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive.
It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist.
Hope that is helpful.
Kieren
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org <mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote:
Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations.
US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014
Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account... <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account...>
I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context …
regards
Robert
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship>
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
<>No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Whether it’s bipartisan or not, the funding cutoff is a destructive intervention in the transition process. It basically is Congress saying, “we don’t care whether you come up with a good plan or not, we don’t want it to happen this year.” From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:27 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Well you both follow Washington closer than I do but I have to say I'm not seeing or hearing it myself. Kieren On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com<mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote: I think Phil’s point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn’t mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM To: Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597<tel:202-559-8597>/Direct 202-559-8750<tel:202-559-8750>/Fax 202-255-6172<tel:202-255-6172>/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Kieren McCarthy Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM To: Robert Guerra Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me. Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine. Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place. A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them. At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things: * Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/ * Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/) * Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/ * A rider in the new funding bill (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr...) Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking. So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of...) I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive. It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist. Hope that is helpful. Kieren On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org<mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote: Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations. US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014 Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account... I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context … regards Robert _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Agree with Milton - this is unfortunate and we will undoubtedly see more of it as we go into the new year. Any sense as to whether doing hill briefings might help? Or is this just politics and rhetoric? On 12/10/2014 10:36 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
Whether it's bipartisan or not, the funding cutoff is a destructive intervention in the transition process.
It basically is Congress saying, "we don't care whether you come up with a good plan or not, we don't want it to happen this year."
*From:*cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kieren McCarthy *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:27 PM *To:* Gomes, Chuck *Cc:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Well you both follow Washington closer than I do but I have to say I'm not seeing or hearing it myself.
Kieren
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com <mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote:
I think Phil's point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn't mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism.
Chuck
*From:*cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>[mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Phil Corwin *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM *To:* Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra
*Cc:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597 <tel:202-559-8597>/Direct 202-559-8750 <tel:202-559-8750>/Fax 202-255-6172 <tel:202-255-6172>/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
*From: *Kieren McCarthy
*Sent: *Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM
*To: *Robert Guerra
*Cc: *cwg-stewardship@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>
*Subject: *Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me.
Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine.
Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place.
A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them.
At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things:
* Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/
* Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/)
* Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/
* A rider in the new funding bill (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr...)
Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking.
So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan.
(http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of...)
I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive.
It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist.
Hope that is helpful.
Kieren
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org <mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote:
Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations.
US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014
Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account...
I know Kieren is on this list, so I'm hoping he might provide additional context ...
regards
Robert
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- Matthew Shears Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) mshears@cdt.org + 44 771 247 2987
I'd say people are pretty serious about it. They will be some hearings in the new year. I'm sure there are staffers that would be happy to get some information beforehand. If this community really wants to score big though, I would say that coming up with answers to the stress tests would be an excellent way forward. Kieren On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Matthew Shears <mshears@cdt.org> wrote:
Agree with Milton - this is unfortunate and we will undoubtedly see more of it as we go into the new year. Any sense as to whether doing hill briefings might help? Or is this just politics and rhetoric?
On 12/10/2014 10:36 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
Whether it’s bipartisan or not, the funding cutoff is a destructive intervention in the transition process.
It basically is Congress saying, “we don’t care whether you come up with a good plan or not, we don’t want it to happen this year.”
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org <cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Kieren McCarthy *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:27 PM *To:* Gomes, Chuck *Cc:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Well you both follow Washington closer than I do but I have to say I'm not seeing or hearing it myself.
Kieren
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
I think Phil’s point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn’t mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism.
Chuck
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Phil Corwin *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM *To:* Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra
*Cc:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
*From: *Kieren McCarthy
*Sent: *Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM
*To: *Robert Guerra
*Cc: *cwg-stewardship@icann.org
*Subject: *Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me.
Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine.
Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place.
A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them.
At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things:
* Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/
* Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/)
* Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/
* A rider in the new funding bill ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr... )
Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking.
So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan.
( http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of... )
I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive.
It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist.
Hope that is helpful.
Kieren
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org> wrote:
Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations.
US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014
Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account...
I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context …
regards
Robert
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing listCWG-Stewardship@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- Matthew Shears Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)mshears@cdt.org+ 44 771 247 2987
On 10/12/2014 21:12, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I think Phil’s point has merit. There has been indications over the last several months that there is less bipartisan bickering and a trend to more cooperation in U.S. politics with regard to the transition. That doesn’t mean that there playing politics has ended but I do think that there is some room for optimism.
Hold on a second, you've just neatly reversed the main contention. Kieren was saying: 1. There is increasing political discontent with the argument that we must rush to achieve IANA transition by a fixed deadline, and that ICANN accountability can be left substantially "unfixed" because of lack of time. 2. This discontent is manifesting itself in numerous ways that evoke partisan opposition to transition itself, including the recent budget measure defunding transition pre-9/15, Phil intervened to point out that the budget measure preventing transition pre-9/15 had bi-partisan support. That doesn't undermine Kieren's warning, it reinforces it. Not only Republicans, but now also Democrats have given their support to a measure intended to prefer a "good" transition that resolves issues with ICANN accountability over an "on-schedule" transition, that fails to do so. We ignore this growing bi-partisan support for good linkage with accountability issues at our peril. Kind Regards, Malcolm.
Chuck
*From:*cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Phil Corwin *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:36 PM *To:* Kieren McCarthy; Robert Guerra *Cc:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Beg to differ on the claim that it is increasingly partisan, what with Dem Senate just accepting 1 year freeze language. I expect a more bipartisan approach in 2015.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
*From: *Kieren McCarthy
*Sent: *Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:30 PM
*To: *Robert Guerra
*Cc: *cwg-stewardship@icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>
*Subject: *Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register
Sorry - only just saw this one and request for a response from me.
Re: context. I don't know whether people are following all the action whirling around this recently. I've been trying to write stories about each new aspect so forgive me if I post a series of links to articles of mine.
Very broadly, several of you on this list have probably been having the usual behind-the-scenes conversations with ICANNers about how the transition must be done by September but also there isn't time for all the accountability work i.e. lobbying for an IANA transition without real accountability changes in place.
A lot of people who have been stung in the past don't like this argument. The NTIA is one of them.
At the same time, there are more than a few people poking the fires in Washington in the lead up to the Republican run Congress. This has resulted in a range of things:
* Internet freedom bill (going nowhere but a usual rallying cry) - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/
* Media articles arguing that IANA transition is bad (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/08/ted_cruz_internet_argument/)
* Congressional hearings coming in the new year - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/gao_questions_into_iana_transition/
* A rider in the new funding bill (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/congress_attempts_to_disrupt_iana_tr...)
Overall, the pressure is on. And it is going increasingly partisan - which is bad news for anyone interested in rational policymaking.
So Strickling is trying to keep everything on track but pushing back on inaccuracies while also, I believe, trying to make it clear to us - the internet community - to get moving on a plan.
(http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/09/commerce_secretary_engages_in_war_of...)
I should say in a quick plug that IoN magazine - which I edit - is writing a special feature on all this for our next issue. Should be comprehensive.
It will be handed out at the NamesCon conference in Las Vegas in early January but we are also mailing it to subscribers so if you are interested in signing up, let me know offlist.
Hope that is helpful.
Kieren
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org <mailto:rguerra@privaterra.org>> wrote:
Just came across this article. Thought it might be of interest given our conversations.
US govt tells ICANN: No accountability, no keys to the internet We publish the 12 'stress tests' DNS overlord must prove it can handle before it keeps IANA By Kieren McCarthy, 5 Dec 2014
Read the "stress tests" for IANA transition and ICANN accountability obtained by The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/05/us_government_tells_icann_no_account...
I know Kieren is on this list, so I’m hoping he might provide additional context …
regards
Robert
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.5557 / Virus Database: 4223/8641 - Release Date: 11/27/14 Internal Virus Database is out of date.
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
participants (7)
-
Gomes, Chuck -
Kieren McCarthy -
Malcolm Hutty -
Matthew Shears -
Milton L Mueller -
Phil Corwin -
Robert Guerra