IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] it's more than that

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 03 May 2015 23:42 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 964C61A8AD6 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 May 2015 16:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.663
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 in_0U5JnwHLE for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 May 2015 16:42:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C3411A8AD3 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 May 2015 16:42:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 20710 invoked from network); 3 May 2015 23:42:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 3 May 2015 23:42:59 -0000
Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 23:42:34 -0000
Message-ID: <20150503234234.33629.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ianaplan@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <1EAA5791-76CA-4EEA-9546-CABBEE1D6524@arin.net>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/VV5IiW_GtgeNiy2EX0qN-zQ_v_M>
Cc: jcurran@arin.net
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] it's more than that
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: Sun, 03 May 2015 23:42:59 -0000

>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/01/icann_iana_latest/
>
>If ICANN is really saying take it or leave it, I don't see that we
>and the RIRs have any option but to leave it.  That would be a huge
>hassle, but given ICANN's history, does anyone dare to give them
>what is in effect a blank check?
>
>I see zero chance of that happening - ...

Just to make sure I counted my negatives correctly, do I correctly
understand that you see zero chance of the blank check happening?

Tnx.

R's,
John

PS: I sure wish I could figure out some way to de-vertically integrate
the names community, but it's a challenge.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email