IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] control and negotiation (was Re: draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call)

"Richard Hill" <rhill@hill-a.ch> Tue, 04 November 2014 21:31 UTC

Return-Path: <rhill@hill-a.ch>
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 9A2911A0012 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 13:31:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 gsd58Tnkrbti for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 13:31:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp3.infomaniak.ch (smtp3.infomaniak.ch [IPv6:2001:1600:2:5:92b1:1cff:fe01:147]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FA801A0010 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 13:31:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Laurie (adsl-178-39-117-99.adslplus.ch [178.39.117.99]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp3.infomaniak.ch (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sA4LVMWH006020; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 22:31:23 +0100
From: Richard Hill <rhill@hill-a.ch>
To: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>, ianaplan@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:31:25 +0100
Message-ID: <GLEAIDJPBJDOLEICCGMNIEOJCNAA.rhill@hill-a.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <545944EA.7070903@meetinghouse.net>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/PpXpBMKSL573UTDLTyMp_EyueBU
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] control and negotiation (was Re: draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call)
X-BeenThere: ianaplan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: rhill@hill-a.ch
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: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 21:31:26 -0000

I agree with Miles. The IANA transition is not an engineering exercise. It
is a contractual exercise.

If the IETF is not the right body to take care of those sorts of issues,
then let's say so and ask somebody else to do the job.

Best,
Richard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ianaplan [mailto:ianaplan-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Miles
> Fidelman
> Sent: mardi, 4. novembre 2014 22:28
> To: ianaplan@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] control and negotiation (was Re:
> draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call)
>
>
> Peterson, Jon wrote:
> >> Somehow, this "oh, if ICANN doesn't do the job, we'll take our ball and
> >> move it elsewhere" seems a rather timid attitude and approach.
> > No, it's just engineering. We're a body of engineers. If we can solve a
> > problem by engineering rather than engaging in politics, it plays to our
> > strengths. When we try to assert some authority over governments and
> > corporations, then we are playing in a space where we have
> little traction
> > or competence and where we are likely to lose.
> >
> > Please stop trying to steer us there.
> >
>
> We are MORE than a body of engineers.  We are a body that promulgates
> standards that are central to global infrastructure, and we are part of
> a body of contractually defined relationships that define roles and
> responsibilities for how those standards are used and implemented.
>
> The whole point of the NTIA transition process is to clarify, and
> re-align some of those roles and responsibilities when the NTIA contract
> goes away - which has very little to do with engineering, and a whole
> lot to do with "techno-politics."
>
> Please stop trying to deny that, or steer us away from the reality of
> the roles and responsibilities associated with the role the IETF plays.
>
> Miles Fidelman
>
>
> --
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list
> Ianaplan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email