Re: [Ianaplan] Question from the ICG

Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@isoc.org> Mon, 09 February 2015 20:21 UTC

Return-Path: <rpelletier@isoc.org>
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 AF2E51A88C0 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:21:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 wrXARs_F-XKH for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:21:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0075.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F7651A88CF for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:21:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.13] (72.237.59.193) by CO1PR06MB238.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.166.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.75.20; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 20:21:32 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@isoc.org>
In-Reply-To: <D0FE5117.147598%jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 15:22:56 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <ABBAC725-0621-42AF-882C-A0DC747AC152@isoc.org>
References: <F22D7C95-49EE-4BB9-9ED9-7475736A46C7@cooperw.in> <01870CB5-34E3-450A-910E-5A18D600B27B@piuha.net> <54D8C55F.9070007@dcrocker.net> <20150209144754.GA5582@mx1.yitter.info> <54D8CC7E.7030100@dcrocker.net> <AC790ADC-C4CC-4D8E-B11A-138FF58D6D8D@standardstrack.com> <CFB653FB-B10A-44E4-9E75-8FCD011F7B7C@isoc.org> <54D8E92C.8020706@dcrocker.net> <03A3C008-E1FD-40D6-B390-41751D782353@isoc.org> <54D8F0A9.4070602@dcrocker.net> <3B29D634-25D1-4702-95CB-80FC34028983@isoc.org> <54D910B7.7080508@gmail.com> <D0FE5117.147598%jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
To: "Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
X-Originating-IP: [72.237.59.193]
X-ClientProxiedBy: BY1PR0201CA0033.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (25.160.191.171) To CO1PR06MB238.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.166.144)
Authentication-Results: neustar.biz; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CO1PR06MB238;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004); SRVR:CO1PR06MB238;
X-Forefront-PRVS: 04825EA361
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6049001)(6009001)(479174004)(377454003)(24454002)(51704005)(51914003)(87976001)(117156001)(36756003)(42186005)(46102003)(15975445007)(77096005)(93886004)(2950100001)(62966003)(77156002)(23746002)(19580405001)(19580395003)(83716003)(57306001)(33656002)(82746002)(92566002)(86362001)(50226001)(122386002)(47776003)(561944003)(50986999)(110136001)(76176999)(40100003)(66066001)(50466002)(104396002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CO1PR06MB238; H:[192.168.0.13]; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CO1PR06MB238;
X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Feb 2015 20:21:32.6941 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CO1PR06MB238
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/KgHzr8qDcxdipchE5ITaIM4nQQM>
Cc: "Ianaplan@Ietf. Org" <ianaplan@ietf.org>, Brian CarpenterG <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Question from the ICG
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: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 20:21:52 -0000

Jon,


> On Feb 9, 2015, at 3:14 PM, Peterson, Jon <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>; wrote:
> 
>> A side note: since the beneficiary of the IETF Trust is the IETF,
>> the IETF's assent is presumably requuired.
> 
> As I've been reading this thread this morning, I've kind of been wondering
> about the same thing.
> 
> I do think we would need a more formal decision that the IETF feels it
> would be appropriate for the Trust to take responsibility for IANA's
> trademark and domains. I mean, in general, of course we should be happy to
> provide functions that are in keeping with our core mission of making the
> Internet better, and there's some historical precedent here. But a lot has
> changed since those historical times: clearly this function has become
> extremely politicized and with that comes a lot of baggage that I worry
> could weigh us down. The Trust exists to own some specific assets, and I'd
> be hesitant to alter its scope, or to make the assets it owns share fate
> with more contentious properties.
> 
> What do we imagine the responsibility we'd be taking on here, as the Trust
> and the IETF, might actually look like? And are there alternatives, like
> forming an independent IANA Trust, that we should consider before we
> signal that we're open to this path?

Just as a point of information.  

This would not be a new thing for the IETF Trust.

On 11 November 2009 at the IETF meeting in Hiroshima the Trustees passed a 
resolution accepting the transfer of the rfc-editor.org domain from the USC Information
Sciences Institute (ISI).

The transfer was to accommodate the move of the RFC Editor from ISI.  ISI decided 
not to submit a proposal in response to an RFP for the RFC Production Center 22 May
2009. AMS was awarded the contract for the RFC Production Center by the IAOC on 
1 October 2009, and the use of the rfc-editor.org domain.

Ray



> 
> Jon Peterson
> Neustar, Inc.
> 
>> 
>>  Brian
>> 
>>> 
>>> ray
>>> 
>>>> On Feb 9, 2015, at 12:38 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>; wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 2/9/2015 9:23 AM, Ray Pelletier wrote:
>>>>> I¹m not comfortable with that wording.  The IETF Trust is an
>>>>> independent body
>>>>> with its own processes and limits.  Thus ³The IETF is willing to have
>>>>> the IETF
>>>>> Trust holdŠ²  I find troublesome.
>>>>> 
>>>>> IMHO the Trust cannot speculate as to what its action will be when
>>>>> there is 
>>>>> an ask from an appropriate party to hold the mark and domain.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Ray,
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for the clarification.  Point taken.
>>>> 
>>>> The corresponding concern has to do with characterizing the ISTCG/IETF
>>>> side of things usefully.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> So again, perhaps a conjunction set:
>>>> 
>>>>   With regards to the IANA trademark and the IANA.ORG domain, both
>>>> are associated with the IANA Numbering Services and not with a
>>>> particular IANA Numbering Services Operator.
>>>> 
>>>>   ThE IETF considers the IETF Trust to be an acceptable candidate for
>>>> holding the trademark and domain.
>>>> 
>>>>   The IETF would support a decision by the IETF Trust to hold the
>>>> IANA mark, and iana.org domain in behalf of the Internet community.
>>>> 
>>>> d/
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Dave Crocker
>>>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
>>>> bbiw.net
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ianaplan mailing list
>>> Ianaplan@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ianaplan mailing list
>> Ianaplan@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan
>