Re: [Ianaplan] Off topic: public comments

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Mon, 10 August 2015 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
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 91E231A1B6B for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 07:55:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.09
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 JReYI5Zm6POe for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 07:55:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E2D11A1B53 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 07:55:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1ZOoTj-0005qB-9G; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 10:55:07 -0400
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 10:55:02 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, ianaplan@ietf.org
Message-ID: <F76034EA2B6D02C6EC773B53@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150810135840.12799.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <20150810135840.12799.qmail@ary.lan>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/Twe_3plpII4vnlYtWHAPK1aUkPs>
Cc: jari.arkko@piuha.net
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Off topic: public comments
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 10 Aug 2015 14:55:10 -0000


--On Monday, August 10, 2015 13:58 +0000 John Levine
<johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

>...
> In ICANN comment processes, the people who matter tend to
> submit their comments either at the moment the period opens or
> at the last minute, so I wouldn't pay too much attention to
> the ones submitted so far.

While that description is certainly consistent with my
observations, it suggests something interesting and problematic
that is the other side of the "anyone can comment" problem.
That is that there are "people who matter" and people who don't.
It isn't clear who makes that decision and on what basis
although I hope it is ICG.  In the ICANN case, the answer has
traditionally been staff with the criteria apparently closely
related to either "opinions that agree with what they would
like" or "domain name sales interests".   

Unless the community and its comment evaluation processes are
very careful (and transparent), we end up with a plan that
reflects the needs and interests of the "multiple stake wielders
who matter" community, not the "multistakeholder community" and,
yes, that is a possible answer to one of the questions that has
been posed.

    john