Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review

S Moonesamy <> Fri, 24 October 2014 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5471A1A48 for <>; Fri, 24 Oct 2014 08:06:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ma13B0F5r8-k for <>; Fri, 24 Oct 2014 08:06:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 189671A1A4A for <>; Fri, 24 Oct 2014 08:06:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s9OF5g4e017443 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 24 Oct 2014 08:05:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail2010; t=1414163158; x=1414249558; bh=1Gdyqw9uyKPvvPuM837hPVB1WKtkUNrqCFed2Z5cSG0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=zzI6y0cmBT3cJXpnqo/whhGZFIhKLeQ7DVxGVXU1LqWLblT8xME9NV6FtYok1BQJp GBF8wSztRkkIMEw8gQy0p5H/RChndr0bHAQ/EsRC4egpAE2TKXJuG1d+C3w3wcAmUO FFLetIvu+Hi03V+V98i6v0mZkYOq9eadgj6wqbCE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1414163158; x=1414249558;; bh=1Gdyqw9uyKPvvPuM837hPVB1WKtkUNrqCFed2Z5cSG0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=MU3CpoZ/0Zuu658RnP/tM+VxcTnXmgKWLsrCVQsSGWe65yw3c7jUKKWba0lAKqi25 QKT/sdX6Mmiq/jDEYE/mTibEsfM1AXyWt55nJPuXxz5/SkIdAmNw8PTvy67+rWIKTR LkG17qTAr11kw0rijYut8H4Z6qXMH9cgou86rtz4=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 06:21:51 -0700
To: Suzanne Woolf <>
From: S Moonesamy <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc:, Eliot Lear <>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 15:06:09 -0000

Hi Suzanne,
At 05:50 24-10-2014, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>Off the top of my head, just in the groups I follow closely: There 
>is another ICANN staffer I know of participating in DPRIVE; he also 
>has a long history as a protocol designer and implementer in matters 
>DNS and WHOIS/PROVREG/WEIRDS. There's at least one person who's held 
>formal roles in the GNSO who has also been an IETF participant, 
>including discussions in DNSOP (and at least a couple more who have 
>posted to IANAPLAN). The CTO of APNIC posted just the other day to 
>WEIRDS, and some other APNIC staff are extremely well-known in DNS 
>and routing groups in the IETF. Staff from RIPE and LACNIC 
>participate in DNSOP discussions and other DNS-related work such as 
>recent BOFs. Assorted technologists, some very senior, associated 
>with TLD operators participate in both ICANN and IETF discussions, 
>and various TLD operators sponsor IETF participation for employees 
>and contractors as contributors, including WG chairs and IAB members 
>from time to time.
>It depends a bit on what you mean by "affiliated," if you're 
>seriously trying to assess cross-participation, but if nothing else, 
>experience suggests that counting noses (or email addresses) isn't 
>actually that helpful.

I usually count reviews.  For what it is worth, I was not counting 
email addresses.

>Would it be better if there was slightly more overlap among 
>ICANN/RIR staff, participants in their processes from other 
>organizations, and participation in the IETF? Probably. (For 
>example, we'd want input from people intimately familiar with 
>matters ICANN in any process to revisit RFC 6761, whether they were 
>ICANN staff or not.) Is the option open to everyone? Yes. Do they 
>sometimes take advantage of it? Yes.
>Eliot's language could stand some tinkering, but I can live with it. 
>Since I owe him text on another point, I'll suggest while I'm here 
>the following revision:
>"It is important to note that the IETF includes anyone who wishes to 
>participate, including staff or other participants from ICANN or the 
>Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), and people affiliated with 
>those organizations regularly do."

The suggested text looks better than what is currently in the 
draft.  I could settle for that.

S. Moonesamy