<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Paying for the IANA functions
- To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [ga] Paying for the IANA functions
- From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:56:35 -0800 (PST)
- Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=5yPrVbWuoZ5NN/gVaDxtUkL2xeibWAhc/A+dpist/UihKjOUUtYlpip7mJVgsJd5Sqlikdp+hO9vl/6En/cI0/hUCqgE4tStxMxqL7NH4knuQ/Cw0d5mTivjT8iauV52rCLOCz91w11N4qappX69wbASQp6qeyr2qExnt96sMjE= ;
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Richard Henderson writes: "You share an international resource. You share in its costs."
The Contract Between ICANN and the United States Government for the Performance of the IANA Function envisions the prospect of parties paying for the IANA services on the basis of fair and equitable fees in which the aggregate charges will not exceed the cost of providing the IANA services (a cost-recovery program):
"On or after the effective date of this purchase order, the Contractor may establish and collect fees from third parties (i.e. other than the United States Government) for the functions performed under this purchase order, provided the fee levels are approved by the Contracting Officer before going into effect, which approval shall not be withheld unreasonably provided the fee levels are fair and equitable and provided the aggregate fees charged during the term of this purchase order do not exceed the cost of providing the requirements of this purchase order." http://www.icann.org/general/iana-contract-17mar03.htm
Perhaps someone in ICANN Management can explain why ICANN has not yet chosen to follow this seemingly reasonable path.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|