Re: [Ianaplan] Update on IANA Transition & Negotiations with ICANN

"Richard Hill" <rhill@hill-a.ch> Thu, 30 April 2015 15:34 UTC

Return-Path: <rhill@hill-a.ch>
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 CEF911B2C8A for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:34:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Md_ysxntmidl for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-sh2.infomaniak.ch (smtp-sh2.infomaniak.ch [128.65.195.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFA251B2CC7 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp3.infomaniak.ch (smtp3.infomaniak.ch [84.16.68.91]) by smtp-sh.infomaniak.ch (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t3UFY6N7001520 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 30 Apr 2015 17:34:06 +0200
Received: from Timea (80-254-69-10.dynamic.monzoon.net [80.254.69.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp3.infomaniak.ch (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t3UFY5O8010908; Thu, 30 Apr 2015 17:34:05 +0200
From: "Richard Hill" <rhill@hill-a.ch>
To: "'Andrew Sullivan'" <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, <ianaplan@ietf.org>
References: <20150430115751.GE65715@mx2.yitter.info> <00c401d08358$a715f860$f541e920$@ch> <20150430153008.GH65861@mx2.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20150430153008.GH65861@mx2.yitter.info>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 17:34:09 +0200
Message-ID: <00c701d0835b$1aeb1160$50c13420$@ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AdCDWo42qf3cS2v9T9GgWaJHXBtsKAAAGk0Q
Content-Language: fr-ch
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/B36VBICt3md1-W8s2GyHye-xiyU>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Update on IANA Transition & Negotiations with ICANN
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: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 15:34:12 -0000

Dear Andrew,

Thank you for the clarification, I had indeed misunderstood.

Do you know whether ICANN would have any objections if the new language only
enters into force if and when the current contract with NTIA is no longer in
force?

Best,
Richard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ianaplan [mailto:ianaplan-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 'Andrew
> Sullivan'
> Sent: jeudi, 30. avril 2015 17:30
> To: ianaplan@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Update on IANA Transition & Negotiations with
> ICANN
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 05:16:36PM +0200, Richard Hill wrote:
> > Thank you for this. Can you please post the exact language that ICANN
> > has difficulty with?
> 
> We're waiting for confirmation as to whether the language as it stood
> was still covered by the normal "private negotation" rules, so I don't
> think I can release the text at the moment.  We're working on that,
> however.  This is in keeping with the normal way the IAOC develops
> these annual supplemental agreement or any other IAOC agreement.
> However, I should note something:
> 
> > However, we are discussing arrangements that would hold if there is
> no
> > longer any contract between ICANN and NTIA
> 
> That is not what we were discussing.  The IETF and ICANN were
> discussing the annual SLA or supplemental agreement.  It would come
> into effect at signing, as all the previous ones have, and since ICANN
> still has an agreement with NTIA right now, ICANN's current agreements
> are (quite correctly) a constraint on what ICANN can do.  I'm sorry if
> that wasn't clear in our update.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Andrew (speaking for myself)
> 
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list
> Ianaplan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan