Re: [Ianaplan] numbers community plan

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Suzanne,

Speaking only for myself...

On 1/8/15 9:12 PM, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
> Marc,

> (...)

> The consensus on the IPR issue in the WG as I understood it was that
> the WG wasn't instructing the IAOC/IAB to seek additional agreements
> about the iana.org <http://iana.org> name, but also was not ruling it
> out. So the current document doesn't really provide guidance on what
> to do if the IETF Trust is asked by other operational communities to
> accept the role hypothesized here, or to enter into a conversation
> about possible terms for doing so.
>
> Is there a need for such guidance from the WG?
>

I hope it always helps those who are going to be engaged in the
discussions if smart people express their opinion.  In addition, it
seems that the IESG intended this WG to be the forum to review and
comment on proposals from other communities when they wrote into the
charter the following:

> 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.[1]
Obviously IPR can impact us.  We should stay focused on the impact to
the IETF.  Discussions that don't impact the IETF seem better homed in
the other communities.

Eliot
[1]http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/ianaplan/charter/