Re: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 07:14:19PM +0100, Richard Hill wrote:
> So, since the IANA function was originally an emanation of the IETF

No, it was not.  It was an emanation of someone to whom various
interested parties deferred.  The IETF didn't exist yet, at least in
the form it subsequently took.

In general, I think foundational arguments in this area are likely to
get us into a dark and very wet swamp.  It seems to me that we need to
concentrate on what outcome we want ("stuff stays the same"), and what
to do in case things fall apart.  "Stay the same" requires, as far as
I can tell, that we not try to negotiate for things we're unlikely to
get, because once you start negotiating you have to decide what things
you're willing to give up, and I think we don't want to give things up
because we like the way things are.  This means we need a different
plan for what to do in case things fall apart.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]