IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review

Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> Tue, 02 September 2014 14:02 UTC

Return-Path: <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
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 545A31A7028 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 07:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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 I5udp19OHuyG for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 07:02:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net (server1.neighborhoods.net [207.154.13.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEDA91A0406 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 07:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9163CC0C6; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 10:02:28 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.6.2 (20081215) (Debian) at neighborhoods.net
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (server1.neighborhoods.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id DGjsu8HG2DKx; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 10:02:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [172.18.2.126] (unknown [69.27.252.130]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 42D79CC08E; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 10:01:52 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <5405CDEF.6040302@meetinghouse.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 10:02:23 -0400
From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, rhill@hill-a.ch, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <GLEAIDJPBJDOLEICCGMNOEGHCKAA.rhill@hill-a.ch> <54059FA9.50107@meetinghouse.net> <5405A18B.2060604@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <5405A18B.2060604@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/h-9hOpmOA1HGoB9e3xsXmId89Mo
Cc: ianaplan@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review
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, 02 Sep 2014 14:02:51 -0000

Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> On 02/09/14 11:44, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>>
>> The whole point of accountability mechanisms, be they in law or contract
>> form, is to address worst case situations.  When things are working,
>> there's little need for such mechanisms.
> Sure. But discussing this when such mechanisms do exist already
> (as is the case for protocol parameters) as if those mechanisms
> did not exist, is what I commented upon. That is not considering
> a worst-case scenario, that constitutes ignoring reality.

Yes, but the MOU can be withdrawn from.  Right now, the NTIA contract 
"backstops" the MOU.  The question becomes: what, if anything replaces 
that backstop?  If I were NTIA, I'd sure like to see that answered  
before stepping away.

Miles Fidelman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email