[AfrICANN-discuss] IANA contract up for rebid

[Anne-Rachel Inné]

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=c564af28581edb2a7b9441eccfd6391d&tab=core&_cview=0<http://domainincite.com/us-puts-icann-contract-up-for-rebid/>
********************
US puts ICANN contract up for
rebid<http://domainincite.com/us-puts-icann-contract-up-for-rebid/>
http://domainincite.com/us-puts-icann-contract-up-for-rebid/<http://domainincite.com/about>

Kevin Murphy <http://domainincite.com/about>, November 11, 2011, 12:23:09
(UTC), Domain Policy <http://domainincite.com/category/domain-policy/>

*The US government has put the IANA contract, which currently gives ICANN
its powers to create new top-level domains, up for competitive bidding.*

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration issued a
request for proposals late yesterday, almost a week later than expected.

The Statement Of Work, which defines the IANA contractor’s
responsibilities, is over twice at long as the current IANA contract,
containing many deliverables and deadlines.

While the contract is open to bidders other than ICANN, ICANN is obviously
the likely winner, so it’s fair to read the SOW in that context.

Notably, the section dealing with approving new gTLDs has been changed
since the draft language released in June.

NTIA said previously<http://domainincite.com/us-revives-the-gac-new-tlds-veto/>that
in order to delegate a new gTLD, ICANN/IANA “shall include
documentation to demonstrate how the proposed string has received consensus
support from relevant stakeholders and is supported by the global public
interest.”

The new SOW has dropped the “consensus support” requirement and instead
states:

The Contractor must provide documentation verifying that ICANN followed its
policy framework including specific documentation demonstrating how the
process provided the opportunity for input from relevant stakeholders and
was supportive of the global public interest.

This could be read as a softening of the
language<http://domainincite.com/icann-fights-government-gtld-power-grab/>.
No longer will ICANN have to prove consensus – which is not a requirement
of the Applicant Guidebook – in order to approve a new gTLD.

However, the fact that it will have to document how a new gTLD is
“supportive of the global public interest” may give extra weight to
Governmental Advisory Committee objections.

If the GAC were to issue advice stating that a new gTLD application was not
in “the global public interest”, it may prove tricky for ICANN to provide
documentation showing that it is.

The SOW also addresses conflicts of interest, which has become a big
issue<http://domainincite.com/senator-calls-for-icann-ethics-controls/>for
ICANN following the departure of chairman and new gTLD proponent Peter
Dengate Thrush, and his subsequent
employment<http://domainincite.com/former-icann-chair-joins-mm/>by new
gTLD applicant Minds + Machines, this June.

The SOW says that IANA needs to have a written conflicts of interest
policy, adding:

At a minimum, this policy must address what conflicts based on personal
relationships or bias, financial conflicts of interest, possible direct or
indirect financial gain from the Contractor’s policy decisions and
employment and post-employment activities. The conflict of interest policy
must include appropriate sanctions in case on non-compliance, including
suspension, dismissal and other penalties.

Overall, the SOW is a substantial document, with a lot of detail.

There’s much more NTIA micromanagement than in the current IANA contract.
Any hopes <http://domainincite.com/icann-independence-request-denied/>ICANN
had that the relationship would become much more arms-length have
been dashed.

The SOW includes a list of 17 deadlines for ICANN/IANA, mainly various
types of compliance reports that must be filed annually. The NTIA clearly
intends to keep IANA on a fairly tight leash.

You can download the RFP documents
here<https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=c564af28581edb2a7b9441eccfd6391d&tab=core&_cview=0>
.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/attachments/20111111/62a93e82/attachment-0001.htm