Not exactly. I would say that instead of IANA that it would be the organization performing the IP Number Resouce Management of the IANA function. More fundamentally why would this working group do this? The policy relationship between IANA and the RIRs is a matter of global policy. It would seem to me that this would be an interface between the RIRs (in this case RIPE NCC amongst others) and a body concerned with global policy. In current circumstances that would be the ASO AC to the ICANN Board, but of course until the RIRs and ICANN can reach agreement on an ASO MoU, that can change as well. Ray "The WG coordinates its work with the appropriate bodies of the other RIRs and the IANA."
-----Original Message----- From: 'Daniel Karrenberg' [mailto:daniel.karrenberg@ripe.net] Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 5:34 PM To: Ray Plzak Cc: 'Hans Petter Holen'; 'Rob Blokzijl'; address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] WG Charter
On 31.08 16:44, Ray Plzak wrote:
2. IANA does not exist as an organization. ICANN performs the IANA functions under a contract with the US DoC. There is nothing to preclude any other organization to perform all or part of
this function.
Under the current circumstances that could be either as a subcontractor to ICANN under the current contract or as a separate contractor to the US DoC.
Point 2 has some interesting scenarios if looked at in the long run.
I read that to mean that you are in agreement with my suggestion. Correct?
Daniel