IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] A draft for your review

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 01 November 2014 00:26 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 D1A751A8756 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:26:14 -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 Zm8t2jyyi4YF for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-x231.google.com (mail-pd0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C1661A8753 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f177.google.com with SMTP id v10so8125063pde.22 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=VH88cEMSpNuH+x1ILGH9TIVdmkN90GLn2Xo44oXRK/g=; b=AZLAMKP1lLi+Q53lXi5tfr1dLzgNT/vHmR9c0OXRDbMmnxV5lySnTBsZwmEzL1vDTv VTvsdFehtKtFrhpSykPGpUOxI/nQg7Ra7wdVLgQOzIZK6R7ARw86w9LhYP2suMXDTqCA vwst4ZQ15Xrt90tt1Bi3p8oDPrPoXLbu/EoV9TE6bY340bIKiSKWHiiaxu9z74v8Vv9x VF2BFr/Eknb+i77y99a3JItSDC2prRffpg6re6/4zl5u+ovo0a8N/5SUnJuwrmbngbib yZpGVRXIhqOxuoOOUD1wiZzfL1iLB1WkRzyvdblyEE8g4m6Gz/0xi1+jfYLHnwqDo3gL tQ9w==
X-Received: by 10.70.48.106 with SMTP id k10mr73306pdn.143.1414801573015; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.23] (247.200.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.200.247]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ub7sm10932782pbc.30.2014.10.31.17.26.10 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <545428AC.3090802@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2014 13:26:20 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>
References: <54017E09.8060504@cisco.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140830052032.0c96c880@resistor.net> <54047E4A.30503@cisco.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140901094544.0b305698@resistor.net> <54059587.8070608@cisco.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20141024004255.0b5ef5d8@resistor.net> <4C1255B9-68C3-45D5-A618-2C7553386DF4@gmail.com> <54522E43.5020709@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <54522E43.5020709@acm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/huiIM7TnK1AEIEvZpP4EGdfYQNw
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: Sat, 01 Nov 2014 00:26:15 -0000

On 31/10/2014 01:25, Avri Doria wrote:
> On 24-Oct-14 21:50, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>> (For example, we'd want input from people intimately familiar with matters ICANN in any process to revisit RFC 6761, whether they were ICANN staff or not.)
> 
> I must admit this is one I have been worrying about as a person who
> inhabits both spaces.  For me it is the one of stress tests the plans
> need to measure against.  Does ICANN, the names operational community,
> have anything to say about 6761 TLDs?

I'm sure they have something to say and that it should be listened to.
But under the IETF-ICANN MoU the power of decision is with the IETF,
subject to IETF process.

>>From one perspective, why would they?
> 
>>From another, why wouldn't they?
> 
> and how does a possibly fragmented IANA(s) deal with the issue?

By each fragment joining in the IETF process. Actually this illustrates
the power of the IETF participation model: we're obliged to consider
the views expressed by IANA people as part of the process of judging rough
consensus. And we'd be really stupid not to.

   Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email