[Ianaplan] Delay in my IESG appeal

[JFC Morfin <[e-mail]>]

Dear Colleagues,

Since I have been unexpectedly led to create the 
<http://iuwg.net/>http://iuwg.net site, I intend to activate this 
unplanned WG for an Intelligent Internet Use and to utilize this 
Libre's Internet Use global community representation spark in order 
to competitively foster some technical governance innovations (as per 
RFC 6852).

As such, my priority does change:

- from expecting the IETF to protect the IUsers in taking the lead of 
the technical governance evolution through an update of the 
IETF/WG/IANAPLAN Charter
- to managing our own protection ourselves in cooperation with the 
IETF, ICANN, ITU, USG, BRICS, SCO, EU, NTIA/FCC, etc. strategies.

This is why my appeal to the IESG will focus on the way the IESG 
should provide adequate guidance to the IETF/WG/IANAPLAN Chairs. The 
starting point of this appeal is, therefore, the ongoing reading of 
the "status quo" strategy sponsored by the Chairs, in opposition to 
my own reading of the IETF position expressed in the Charter, of 
which the implications have to be considered better (hence the 
endless debate on issues like iana.org).

This is going to give me more time:

- to extend my draft (now 
<http://iuwg.net/images/draft-iuwg-intlnet-sdo-registry-relations.01.pdf>http://iuwg.net/images/draft-iuwg-intlnet-sdo-registry-relations.01.pdf. 
Taking advantage from Olaf Kolkman remark on BCP 59).
- evaluate the consequences of the Nov 10 IETF/WG/IANAPLAN meeting.
- evaluate the consequences of the Nov 10 Putin-Xi Jinping meeting.
- evaluate the consequences of the ITU PP 14.
- evaluate the first feedback of my draft concerning the network 
master and master model and plug-ins.

I hope that this may eventually lead to a convergence between Eliot's 
Draft and mine. I am aware that it will most probably call for 
IESG/IAB/ISOC involvement since I am not permitted to directly 
discuss it at the [e-mail] last call level.

jfc