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

Hi
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 07:25:10PM +0100, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> >
> > Do I understand this to mean that IETF  wants to get it's RFP response to
> > ICG activated and operational before conclusion of the transition
> process?
>
> I don't think so.
>

Great. This is the response i expected and i would have been surprised if
otherwise. Based on above then it may be important to clarify the section
of the IAB chair's(your) statement below:

Understanding this consensus[*i.e the IANAPLAN*], the IETF leadership have
been negotiating with ICANN to include text to satisfy these points in
our *annual
Service Level Agreement*.  After some iterations, we arrived at text that
we think captures the IETF consensus[*i.e the consensus achieved on
IANAPLAN* which has been submitted to ICG]

The interpretation of the statement above could imply that IETF wants to
make operational the proposal that came out of IANAPLAN. It is based on
that, that i think the response from ICANN below may not be entirely out of
order:

After some iterations, we arrived at text that we think captures the IETF
consensus[*i.e the proposal from IANAPLAN*], but ICANN has informed us that
they are unable to *agree* to that text *right now*.

So generally speaking (and based on information available to me), it seem
this is a timing issue and there may just be need to clarify from ICANN if
they are fine with agreeing with the term post-NTIA.

As you have rightly stated, I believe the current agreement should-be/is
sufficient enough at ensuring IETF continue to get its usual IANA function
service.

Regards

>
> I just reviewed the minutes from IETF 91 at
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/91/minutes/minutes-91-ianaplan.  To
> me, it was plain that we were just planning to include items in our
> negotiation this year (I spent about 3 minutes looking for an email
> thread to that effect, too, in which I seem to recall having
> participated).  None of that negotiation entails that it needs to be
> completed before the ICG has proceeded.
>
> Best regards,
>
> A (as ever, speaking for myself)
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list
> Ianaplan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan
>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !