IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review

Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> Tue, 02 September 2014 15:13 UTC

Return-Path: <eburger@standardstrack.com>
X-Original-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724441A0686 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 08:13:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=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 7Dnd2WNFfIsN for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 08:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from biz104.inmotionhosting.com (biz104.inmotionhosting.com [173.247.246.244]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 441551A06AC for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 08:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=standardstrack.com; s=default; h=In-Reply-To:To:References:Date:Subject:Mime-Version:Message-Id:Content-Type:From; bh=NTRKt75ProY65fCbdeo3Bj+BxpxPdIePuAmmFpAGaPs=; b=KShAxLu5IcKmnWzb1JeRBJt5Hb8uYgkLCMhbBhzfO/16+KajLHW92MMcHDQCwDXo6vqgpibFkSiNTyyUPkvrhJUEz+7TJpsD3iP047qz48J9VURwuWSBLuyTtMnLtgYnknlkkgCwhc3O+HViyPuTojJ8mn4XezQbE9jTjPFXODU=;
Received: from [64.233.1.133] (port=56046 helo=[192.168.11.52]) by biz104.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eburger@standardstrack.com>) id 1XOpm9-0006gt-Ue for ianaplan@ietf.org; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:13:50 -0700
From: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_80C35C13-7F21-482B-A95E-BA48FEA91E14"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
Message-Id: <F0245D29-3E6D-4360-9BC8-6952F417DC5E@standardstrack.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 11:13:36 -0400
References: <GLEAIDJPBJDOLEICCGMNOEGHCKAA.rhill@hill-a.ch> <54059FA9.50107@meetinghouse.net> <5405A18B.2060604@cs.tcd.ie> <5405CDEF.6040302@meetinghouse.net> <5405CF6B.3050704@cisco.com> <5405D188.5070508@meetinghouse.net> <FB7609FA-2146-475F-A3D0-F924895146EC@virtualized.org>
To: ianaplan@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <FB7609FA-2146-475F-A3D0-F924895146EC@virtualized.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - biz104.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - standardstrack.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: biz104.inmotionhosting.com: authenticated_id: eburger+standardstrack.com/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/4FTF6_ptWvXmjoJthbc4qV5Ww_k
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review
X-BeenThere: ianaplan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <ianaplan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/>
List-Post: <mailto:ianaplan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:13:52 -0000

On Sep 2, 2014, at 10:38 AM, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> wrote:

> On Sep 2, 2014, at 7:17 AM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> wrote:
[snip]
>> What will be the process if IETF decides that the job isn't being done well and wants to replace ICANN as the registry operator?  
> 
> Perhaps something similar to the replacement of the RFC Editor (not to say that it wasn’t being performed well, rather that there was a process established to change it).

It is also enumerated in the MoU. Non issue.

> What if ICANN decides it wants to levy fees?  
> 
> If the IETF community decides that is unreasonable, it’d probably trigger the replacement.  The MoU, after all, is terminable.

Precisely.

> Who makes such decisions, and how?  Etc.
> 
> Who decided to replace the RFC Editor, and how?

That is the remit of the IAB.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email