Re: [Ianaplan] Consensus call -- text reply for ICG proposal review

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Sun, 23 August 2015 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 21ADD1A8AF0 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 09:11:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.61
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 9oIPR1-IFuhv for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 09:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F3461A8AE3 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 09:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1ZTXrf-000GUt-H4; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:11:23 -0400
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:11:18 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Richard Hill <rhill@hill-a.ch>, 'Eliot Lear' <lear@cisco.com>, "'Leslie Daigle (ThinkingCat)'" <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>
Message-ID: <1FA39989275F3D8A3608ADE8@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <018e01d0ddbb$a75c47d0$f614d770$@ch>
References: <95236452-2600-473E-B326-8AB8242484B4@thinkingcat.com> <018901d0dc22$4efb3870$ecf1a950$@ch> <BAB634F7-2429-4C09-AAAF-96D47C78EB51@thinkingcat.com> <01a801d0dc24$531bab40$f95301c0$@ch> <55D74BF9.2090901@cisco.com> <020001d0dc2c$b5514ba0$1ff3e2e0$@ch> <D3394ED976549059B1694F5B@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <018e01d0ddbb$a75c47d0$f614d770$@ch>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/BmVLWg9QOqRhR3A2kzdlHXsBn_8>
Cc: "'Ianaplan@Ietf. Org'" <ianaplan@ietf.org>, 'Marc Blanchet' <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Consensus call -- text reply for ICG proposal 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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 16:11:28 -0000


--On Sunday, August 23, 2015 17:51 +0200 Richard Hill
<rhill@hill-a.ch> wrote:

> Dear John,
> 
> Thank you for this.
> 
> I fully agree with your comments (1), (2), (3), and following,
> and that's why I don't think that this group should endorse
> the non-protocol parts of the ICG proposal.
> 
> Would you be comfortable with the alternative wording proposed
> by Brian, which is OK for me, and also for Marc?

See my initial two points.  I think the IETF should confine
itself to "endorsing" parts of the proposal that are
specifically consistent with our relationship as a customer of
the IANA function and should be circumspect about anything else,
especially things that could cloud that customer relationship or
put agreements made as part of it in jeopardy.   I don't
consider the new text an ideal way to make that distinction, but
I don't have a better solution and it is probably adequate.

    john