IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] Taking a step toward the IANA Transition

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Fri, 09 January 2015 14:00 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.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 785941A87A7; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 06:00:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 rJj0fs6c4j-J; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 06:00:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11CEB1A87A2; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 06:00:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3000; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1420812047; x=1422021647; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=SkNybexlCecYrahdB60j3ZQdWX+XhHsbE/SQ4cvWYBE=; b=CNtntOTGuJk25TisitmaTK1e7qyEx73r8RDMeYTOd9WeloJbO/1krCTZ NOgKVq1G7msztNJgi0Y01hVXu4qhlCaz0E8NbshdfT36dPePtPtOXe1nW aZc2sgHGL4qSCd7xRsd7uPe8YWJMZjMrNzZi9zKOWtJ2I++sEIr5KbJ1I M=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 486
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnUHAHrer1StJssW/2dsb2JhbABcg1hZgwS1a40VhW8CgVkBAQEBAX2EDAEBAQMBI1UBEAsYCRYLAgIJAwIBAgFFBgEMAQcBAQULiBAIDbUMk2IBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEXj3kHgmiBQQWEOgKLSYEphhWGFoteIoNvPYJ0AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,731,1413244800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="300961794"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2015 14:00:45 +0000
Received: from [10.61.104.125] (dhcp-10-61-104-125.cisco.com [10.61.104.125]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t09E0iAL008126; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 14:00:44 GMT
Message-ID: <54AFDF0B.3070702@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 15:00:43 +0100
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jefsey <jefsey@jefsey.com>, "ianaplan@ietf.org" <ianaplan@ietf.org>
References: <54AE9663.4010706@cisco.com> <201501091329.t09DTP5b029007@rcdn-core-7.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <201501091329.t09DTP5b029007@rcdn-core-7.cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="BP5fTpIDNa5SSkUHdUWfg5W9RvlM0Q6Ha"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/VSWP9WR8At2-d1wQ7HkbLmw4pDY>
Cc: gene@iuwg.net, "iucg@ietf.org" <iucg@ietf.org>, iab <iab@iab.org>, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Taking a step toward the IANA Transition
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: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 14:00:52 -0000

Hi JFC,
On 1/9/15 2:29 PM, Jefsey wrote:
> At 15:38 08/01/2015, Eliot Lear wrote:
>
>> Jari and I have put together a short blog on where we are.  This working
>> group in particular should be pleased with its work.
>>
>> http://www.ietf.org/blog/2015/01/taking-a-step-towards-iana-transition/
>>
>> Eliot
>
> Jari and Eliot,
>
> I do not understand. Is the draft to be published as an RFC, yes or
> no? This is not immaterial: since if it is to be published I only have
> until March 6, 2015 to file an appeal, of which the matter is now
> clarified by the eventual IESG choice of a US leadership on the IETF
> technology that you made official yesterday. Lynn St-Amour is rightly
> pleased. Many are most probably not.

The IESG has taken its decision, and the document stands approved.  It
will be published as an RFC.

>
>
> You fully understand that the sentence "When ready, they will submit
> the final proposal to the NTIA. The NTIA must then consider and
> approve the proposal", being co-signed by the IETF Chair, is of a
> purely political nature and cannot have anything to do with any
> technical norm concerning my and people's personal Catenet properties.

If you are referring to the blog, of course it is not normative to our
processes, but informative to the community.

>
> Therefore, there was a global IETF.
> http://www.ietf.org/blog/2015/01/taking-a-step-towards-iana-transition/ changed
> that: you have now formally published that it forked to a USIETF.

I don't know who the USIETF is, but this organization is known as the IETF.

>
>
> One of the IETF core values was to responsibly decide on an
> "omnistakeholder" rough consensus basis. If the NTIA is now to first
> approve its propositions, why not China, Russia, Germany, UK, France,
> etc.? And/or Google, Apple, Xerox, NSA, etc.?

It was the NTIA who sought information through ICANN.  If China or
anyone else cares to ask us a question, we can determine how best to
answer them just as we did in this case.

Eliot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email