[address-policy-wg] WG Charter

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 at ripe.net] 
> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 5:34 PM
> To: Ray Plzak
> Cc: 'Hans Petter Holen'; 'Rob Blokzijl'; address-policy-wg at 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
>