IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Tue, 04 November 2014 18:25 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@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 EB27F1ACD5A for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 10:25:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -115.095
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-115.095 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.594, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 jO9KH7FW154n for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 10:25:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47D3F1ACD59 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 10:25:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2590; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1415125547; x=1416335147; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=cvBWO4ldMdDR9t4k2pYLs2rVKIIzCslI+XdLTP6e8yc=; b=k4R/kU1m/6X9cLYMrUuzUfA2n8sIz0RFiwPoF6PivFlpmj5t8WrwOGzW 9Q4el6sbS8VRDcu09qnpNESgvlrDA9cedqA7Mo+Ruopg+7E2MG5QJCOzQ UtwBjcM1aU8ma3b9e47kYvS389Jyk5fob4BcMVifTfSxyhiv/cbTaKaMA M=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 496
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,314,1413244800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="366128919"
Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Nov 2014 18:25:46 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com [173.37.183.86]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sA4IPkI0009757 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 4 Nov 2014 18:25:46 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([fe80::8c1c:7b85:56de:ffd1]) by xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com ([173.37.183.86]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 12:25:46 -0600
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call
Thread-Index: AQHP+FwQKbmNgJUTCkKNoubv2WqUJ5xRLVmA
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 18:25:45 +0000
Message-ID: <00F4BBBF-E679-405C-90B2-BA02A0862679@cisco.com>
References: <6ACE138D-0969-4D8F-9A64-3D1FBB96885A@viagenie.ca> <FC8732DC-BB60-45A2-BF30-0B085CA5FEB9@cooperw.in> <5454B8DE.8040308@cs.tcd.ie> <E5F99046-6C9D-4170-B408-9CA9B7CD6476@gmail.com> <D07CEABF.1357FC%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <40696145-F2EA-428B-911D-60AD5988BE43@cisco.com> <545918F8.40200@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <545918F8.40200@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.20.249.164]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4C10EAB8-548B-40FF-9519-AB4E25BBCC7D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/cKjpIxFKu9IPr5bJDvzPGJIdKQs
Cc: "ianaplan@ietf.org" <ianaplan@ietf.org>, Jon Peterson <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call
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: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 18:25:49 -0000

On Nov 4, 2014, at 11:20 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:

> Just on this point.
> 
> On 11/4/14, 7:39 AM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) wrote:
>> 
>> Related to this, I find the phrase "IAOC is asked to conclude a supplemental agreement that ..." weird. Does this mean IAOC has to do this? or that IETF wishes that they try to get that? or what? I have no idea, but one thing I am sure about is that this draft is the wrong place and wrong time to change the relationship between IETF and IAOC. This should be phrased such that it is clear it is within in the normal existing relationship of the IETF and IAOC. 
>> 
>> 
> 
> We are not changing the relationship in the document.  The point is that
> the IAOC is the arm of our organization that makes these sorts of
> arrangements.  In this case matters are complicated by the fact that the
> responsibility is shared, as per RFC 6220, with the IAB (amongst
> others), and we are producing a response document that identifies needs
> that should be addressed.  We could simply say that "A supplemental
> agreement should be concluded that says," and leave as an inference that
> it is in fact the IAOC, but a normal human being might not quite follow
> that.
> 
> Eliot
> 

what do you mean by the word "conclude" here ? I'm trying to get at is this something you would like the IAOC to try and achieve along with many other goals of a negation or is this something that they absolutely have to achieve to be allowed to agree to the outcome of the negotiation.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email