Re: [Ianaplan] Fwd: WG Action: Formed Planning for the IANA/NTIA Transition (ianaplan)

"Leaf Yeh" <> Fri, 12 September 2014 06:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1321B1A045D for <>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S0xbsIRK1aVA for <>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39DF51A0313 for <>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id lj1so525844pab.15 for <>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:mime-version :content-type:thread-index:content-language; bh=0YBOEn7KG9ARs6O4juFX1pjfdChc9VphSCTtsHEQYYw=; b=VTOzT1/Bh/yD5gFQX6ND0zpT8Ckh7LmLfavDYvTM+oN8fEGTRS6BvLTb0DjqWAsVAZ j5P7aiQPDv18x8DhHRntqsvQA5Gjuuxry6/1oPVY7h63A5w7N7XiBUhaSq8E2PYAeJAw mQUusXAehl8O3WtpaBUJR03lv7r/Me8LkEo3fKIWim6G23HXC6r9knqC6pNFss379o7z OcFojE8dmlpiocbzBcNYRmng+R5br0o6uHh/EUK6kUhRw/2pVJfgYzShZZPyN/NEGAeT PWpEbTVgSu2FGjL4sOMYSk8ThcNzJNIviFdqtkI9oTFRc8Ce/xkCojkh4nNxrOJLKBMd ejeA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id o7mr9123400pdl.141.1410502766833; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from PC ([]) by with ESMTPSA id fn1sm2724297pdb.88.2014. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
X-Google-Original-Message-ID: <002001cfce51$55f5aaf0$01e100d0$>
From: Leaf Yeh <>
To: 'Marc Blanchet' <>,
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 14:18:09 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0021_01CFCE94.6418EAF0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Ac/LgPL9u4OFZYhYT2eNuoAcElJyWACzzFqg
Content-Language: zh-cn
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Fwd: WG Action: Formed Planning for the IANA/NTIA Transition (ianaplan)
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: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:19:31 -0000



Best Regards,





From: Ianaplan [] On Behalf Of Marc Blanchet
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 12:21 AM
Subject: [Ianaplan] Fwd: WG Action: Formed Planning for the IANA/NTIA Transition (ianaplan)


FYI,  Marc.


Début du message réexpédié :

De: The IESG <>

Objet: WG Action: Formed Planning for the IANA/NTIA Transition (ianaplan)

Date: 8 septembre 2014 12:02:52 UTC−4

À: IETF-Announce <>

Cc: ianaplan WG <>

Répondre à:


A new IETF working group has been formed in the General Area. For
additional information please contact the Area Directors or the WG

Planning for the IANA/NTIA Transition (ianaplan)
Current Status: Proposed WG

 Marc Blanchet <>
 Leslie Daigle <>

Assigned Area Director:
 Jari Arkko <>

Mailing list
 To Subscribe:



Registries of parameter values for use in IETF protocols are stored
and maintainted for the IETF by the Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority (IANA), and are the subject of the "IANA Considerations"
section in many RFCs.

For a number of years, this IANA function has been provided by the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).  The
IETF's relationship with IANA was formalized through a Memorandum of
Understanding between the IETF and ICANN codified in 2000 with the
publication of RFC 2860.  Over time, processes and role definitions
have evolved, and have been documented in supplemental agreements.

ICANN has had a contract with the US Department of Commerce (DoC) to
provide the IANA function, undertaken through the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA).  In March of
2014, NTIA announced its intention to transition out of its current
role, meaning that NTIA would not need to renew its contract with
ICANN when that contract expires 30 September 2015.  NTIA requested a
transition proposal be prepared to outline the necessary
arrangements. In the case of the elements of the IANA function
concerning the IETF protocol registries, it is likely that the
existing well-documented practices will continue and no or little new
activity will be required.


The IANAPLAN working group is chartered to produce an IETF consensus
document that describes the expected interaction between the IETF and
the operator of IETF protocol parameters registries.

The system in place today for oversight of the IETF protocol
registries component of the IANA function works well. As a result,
minimal change in the oversight of the IETF protocol parameters
registries is preferred in all cases and no change is preferred when
possible. The working group will address the implications of moving
the NTIA out of its current role with respect to IANA on the IETF
protocol parameters registry function in a way that focuses on
continuation of the current arrangements.  The working group will
assume the following documents continue to be in effect:

- RFC 2850
- RFC 3777 and its updates
- RFC 2860
- RFC 6220
- ICANN-IETF Supplemental Agreements
  (updated yearly since 2007, the 2014 version is available at

This working group is chartered solely with respect to the planning
needed for the transition, and is not meant to cover other topics
related to IANA. Possible improvements outside that scope will be set
aside for future consideration. However, the mechanisms required to
address the removal of the overarching NTIA contract may require
additional documentation or agreements. The WG will identify, but
not create, such required agreements.

Should proposals made by other communities regarding the
transition of other IANA functions affect the IETF protocol parameter
registries or the IETF, the WG may also review and comment on them.

Fully documenting the interaction between the IETF and the operator
of IETF protocol parameters registries may require detailed terms of
agreements or other details of procedures that are normally delegated
to and handled by the IAB or IAOC. The working group will not attempt
to produce or discuss documentation for these details, but will
request the IAB or IAOC to provide them separately.

The WG shall seek the expertise of the IAB IANA Evolution Program to
formulate its output. It is expected that members of the IAB IANA
Evolution Program will actively participate in the WG.

 Jan 2015 - complete protocol parameters registries document
 May 2015 - review of other transition proposals, if needed
 Sep 2015 - close