Tfd22

There is a lot that seems stinky with this deal... but The Register has reported that it was pressure from the US Government that led to ICANN's decision to remove the price caps from .org (without which the sale of PIR likely wouldn't have gone ahead). So it's hard to see how the transition away from US oversight would have been a factor here.

In fact, possibly it's quite the opposite - the NRO only has the power to request this information from ICANN due to additional community powers that were put in place as part of the process to end US oversight. So now the Internet community can steer ICANN in ways it couldn't before this change and (in theory) doesn't have to rely on vague threats from the US Gov to keep ICANN honest.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/07/01/org_domain_icann/

>Worse, the decision to push ahead with the contract change and ignore opposition to the price caps appears to have been made solely to appease two of the most powerful internet registries that ICANN is supposed to be overseeing, and in response to subtle pressure from the US government.

[...]

>One of the very few comments in favor of lifting the price caps specifically noted comments from the head of the US Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division about how it supported "reducing regulation, by encouraging competitive markets" and then noted in the same paragraph that ICANN "had its contracts reviewed by the DoJ’s antitrust division, which concluded that only .com had market power in the domain space."

>It was a clear message that ICANN would be crossing not only its main funders but also its own government (ICANN is based in Los Angeles) if it did not approve the changes.

The NRO is essentially just a brand the five RIRs use when they want to make public statements of this sort. So read this as a statement from the CEOs of these five orgs.

With this request, I suspect they are more concerned with ensuring proper processes were followed within ICANN rather than the outcome. I think they are primarily concerned with maintining trust in the wider "Internet governance ecosystem" (that they are a part of). This is a concern as there is greater pressure from governments that want to make the case that the current model is not working and should be reorganised along UN/ITU terms.