Re: [Ianaplan] Transition proposal for naming-related functions

"John Levine" <> Tue, 05 May 2015 13:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04AAE1ACE32 for <>; Tue, 5 May 2015 06:58:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
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 ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pMrtnshUyV24 for <>; Tue, 5 May 2015 06:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 679711ACE22 for <>; Tue, 5 May 2015 06:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 10373 invoked from network); 5 May 2015 13:58:20 -0000
Received: from unknown ( by with QMQP; 5 May 2015 13:58:20 -0000
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 13:57:55 -0000
Message-ID: <20150505135755.41943.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Transition proposal for naming-related functions
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 13:58:26 -0000

>"It is the preference of the Internet Number Community that the IANA trademark and the
>IANA.ORG<> domain name be transferred to an entity independent of the IANA Numbering
>Services Operator, in order to ensure that these assets are used in a non-discriminatory manner for the
>benefit of the entire community."
>I guess the fact that its noted as a "preference" would make it not be an absolute transition
>prerequisite. (not to second-guess the numbers community intent)

My recollection (check the archives of the ianaplan list) is that
while we saw no reason not to transfer the IANA trademark and domain
name to the IETF Trust, there were more important issues.  Or to look
at it from the other direction, if the situation with some insane
son-of-ICANN got so bad that there were competing protocol or address
registries, the name of the web site would be the least of our