Re: [Ianaplan] Adrian Farrel's No Record on draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-06: (with COMMENT)

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

To address Adrian's point below:

On 12/16/14, 11:05 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>
> Thanks again, Eliot, for pushing on with this.
>
>  
>
> Eliot and I chatted to complete the details of our differences. I
> think we're there on all of the points.
>
>  
>
> Perhaps the biggest issue was around my question on the first response
> in Question V.
>
>  
>
> What i intended to try to draw out was the difference between the
> multistakeholder aspects in the development of the proposal, and in
> the content of the proposal (i.e. in the structures and process that
> would be put in place if the proposal was accepted).
>
>  
>
> The current text is a good explanation of how the IETF is open and
> effectively a multistakeholder organisation. But it lacks the hooks to
> the two different points.
>
>  
>
> I think this can be handled easily with a little lead in text about
> how the proposal was developed using normal IETF processes and how the
> essence of the proposal is to use existing IETF processes to continue
> to set policy for and guide the IANA protocol registry functions.
>

I propose replacement text as follow:

OLD:


        Everyone is welcome to participate in IETF activities.  The
        policies and procedures are outlined in the documents we named
        above.  In-person attendance is not required for
        participation, and many people participate in email
        discussions that have never attended an IETF meeting.  An
        email account is the only requirement to participate.  The
        IETF makes use of both formal and informal lines of
        communication to collaborate with other organizations within
        the multistakeholder ecosystem.


NEW:

Because the IETF is open to everyone, participation is open to all
stakeholders.  IETF processes outlined in Section I were used to
develop this proposal.  Those same processes have been and shall be
used to amend governance of the protocol parameters function.  As
mentioned previously, anyone may propose amendments to those
processes, and anyone may take part in the decision process.

This text is somewhat more directed at the question.  I do not propose
to make a distinction between the different forms of
multistakeholderism, although I agree with Richard that there are
different forms.  Our response is clearly within the bounds of what the
NTIA and the ICG has discussed.

Eliot