Re: [Ianaplan] Question from the ICG

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 29 September 2015 21:32 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 AFA2A1B5144 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:32:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 2hdycEskJE66 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x235.google.com (mail-pa0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 570151B5141 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pacex6 with SMTP id ex6so17108945pac.0 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:32:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zxvjQn4JZUzosHYm4ImydAqKtWK/EQ8IhtsAcoGANls=; b=jyd9uAYaYcipK2E1AmR79JMKkWXP6pVjDxTMQw1Fhw3w6Nek0xt94AOdqj20K9Xk49 WUQbP7hotBY1lj/mUi3RQR3j19nWhUbPOxWEbFU+beD2ny75clrc/Nt6xUbz0g5FbFex bK4guiXevcHWubQOVW+Dczy6CKuox1Xh79Uq1hZR5RKcpy2U1Qba30mHV9deZRYZ4RcY GzwlkUXcFd9K5rHhhWWvRxZ6bbqzE28nQ/EqsCwR/Rqtzy7TvdMOjbKWUi4+Odj9xze6 3feTFjo03fSUd8uQ1jxMzt63jbde8STT+bi1vZ8BZbVtaOAnWhoP3nlu2quDWoLT0VO3 zufg==
X-Received: by 10.66.65.228 with SMTP id a4mr231790pat.19.1443562354804; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:32:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:6e4b:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:6e4b:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w5sm27363301pbs.31.2015.09.29.14.32.31 for <ianaplan@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
To: ianaplan@ietf.org
References: <56A1B728-98DF-409A-B2B6-2624F53FE175@cooperw.in> <3A58359B-420B-4FEC-B812-4659D980C5D3@vigilsec.com> <CAD_dc6gSKTURuXkFuay8dUKm6i+c9amEgmRQ_-Y37C_hv5i45Q@mail.gmail.com> <20150929151542.GB86614@mx2.yitter.info> <560AC921.4090700@gih.com> <D838CBAB-B68F-407A-9D83-8CAA745D00F9@vigilsec.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <560B0373.8070503@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 10:32:35 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D838CBAB-B68F-407A-9D83-8CAA745D00F9@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/fmcOIGiXwefcQvQSsW-Hp8D7Jco>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Question from the ICG
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 29 Sep 2015 21:32:36 -0000

On 30/09/2015 07:00, Russ Housley wrote:

...
> To me, the best response to the ICG is that informal coordination existed today and we will continue it in the future.

Agreed. All our collective experience with liaisons with numerous other organisations
has surely taught us that informal methods and overlapping participants work much
better than formal liaisons with their slow and sometimes Kafkaesque paper-pushing
mechanisms (even with virtual paper).

Of course we can be formal if circumstances force us into it, but there's
nothing to be gained by making it sound like a good thing.

    Brian