Re: [CCG] [Trustees] Proposed Changes to License Agreements between ICANN and IETF Trust

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Wed, 03 May 2017 16:34 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1701129B29 for <ccg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 May 2017 09:34:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.801
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mU3Lham2QPb8 for <ccg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 May 2017 09:34:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89A0B129457 for <ccg@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 May 2017 09:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4CB30050D for <ccg@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 May 2017 12:31:37 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id paCu_oP0SCcn for <ccg@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 May 2017 12:31:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.home (pool-108-45-101-150.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.45.101.150]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C710300408; Wed, 3 May 2017 12:31:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <A1ADE5BB-15D9-4AE3-909D-0400D95DF148@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_72328D3E-B603-4509-A8EE-E3E501F39C49"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 12:31:35 -0400
In-Reply-To: <55FE6802-7C2A-4537-8394-F567D34D4C16@christopherwilkinson.eu>
Cc: IETF Trustees <trustees@ietf.org>, CCG PTI <ccg@ietf.org>
To: CW Mail <mail@christopherwilkinson.eu>
References: <149373262717.9880.7516296670939349912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <B93C13CA-3D82-45BC-9980-DF7AB84D4A09@christopherwilkinson.eu> <99DB6EA3-B942-47E1-BB60-43326947DAE1@isoc.org> <55FE6802-7C2A-4537-8394-F567D34D4C16@christopherwilkinson.eu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccg/BIV_WCp4VfA-TwoJ2GQ0-jWNWII>
Subject: Re: [CCG] [Trustees] Proposed Changes to License Agreements between ICANN and IETF Trust
X-BeenThere: ccg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA IPR Community Coordination Group <ccg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccg>, <mailto:ccg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccg/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccg>, <mailto:ccg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 16:34:08 -0000

Christopher:

>> The Trustees have an obligation to have community review as was stated 
>> as next steps in the prior communications with the CCG.
> 
> I think there are some ambiguities here. At first sight I would suggest that it is the CCG members who would trigger Community Review.
> That is why I sought clarification as to which Community entities would be consulted and by whom.

From my perspective, everyone has been consulted in the proper order.

The IETF Trust asked the CCG for review before calling for the community review.  This gave the CCG members an opportunity to reach out to anyone that they thought appropriate at that time.  I know that some CCG members asked for legal review at that time.

The IETF Trust has an obligation to ask the community for review before signing.  They are fulfilling that obligation.

Russ