IANA Transition a Waste of Time, Decision Has Already Been Made

Dear (name withheld):
I just read your email and attachment dated July 23, 2014. Unfortunately the goal of NETmundial (which you refer to) that the transition of the IANA stewardship “take place through an open process with the participation of all stakeholders extending beyond the ICANN community” has already been subverted. This is now a closed ICANN-centric process essentially comprised of just 3 groups of "insiders" who will ultimately come up with a plan to transition everything to ICANN--in fact Vint Cerf and Google have already started a big PR campaign with video wherein Vint states "NTIA has presented a plan to end this contractual oversight and hand that responsibility over to ICANN" and Larry Strickling of NTIA has now "moved the goalposts" in his speech 3 days ago when he said "Now that ICANN has demonstrated its ability to perform these functions with the support of the community, there is no longer a need for the United States to designate ICANN to perform these functions and we are not obligated to maintain a contract when it is no longer needed."

In other words, Strickling is saying the role performed by the US government is no longer needed--no oversight, no accountability, no verification--nothing, nada--needed

Which begs the question, then WHY have an ICG process at all???

Is it all for show? To make everyone "feel good" that the "multistakeholder" or "internet community" agreed to this (when in reality it was decided by the US government, ICANN insiders, and special interests). As I said at the conclusion of Strickling's AEI speech: "Multistakeholderism" means that ICANN insiders, the US government, and special interests control the Internet DNS--now and in the future.

So [name withheld], if you (or anyone else) truly want something different than where this process is now headed, you might be wiser to invest your time elsewhere. Parlez-vous français?

Best regards,

John Poole
Domain Mondo

Domain Mondo archive