Re: [Ianaplan] Time frame inquiry

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Sun, 31 May 2015 00:16 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@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 8BB071B2A68 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 May 2015 17:16:09 -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 PW7RFsdhHYHw for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 May 2015 17:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]) (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 A75971B2A64 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 May 2015 17:16:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibut5 with SMTP id ut5so10260632wib.1 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 May 2015 17:16:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=8ZWyZDI2rxiP93cRNIBLzKHyYQEfAzgkA5/X2ueEcl0=; b=YKe9/GzE18M2c1y3WwZGtEc6jgGX5AF0VH6p2RUrVAoUUHuAptnxg/vBWDXUXduoA8 f+ayXoiZBAwU70Z7sMiF+0ayMQggtnokyo38BkqjIw9qxqcSYLDlV8dT+V7E/S4y/JD/ f1lXDaNiDlNK2m/cc9NxyR/0GExKghMrUGIdhNyuIrm5nRHi2Pz3Z/W25+feDVM4w7IJ pCAEdIOHo00MxCGMKGVxaD7cTmQFkHK+HaIraaj+Yhu2tDXIH0je8gbybKXqGS3N1zZ2 5lUw3Cud/Bajwshzhv/JotLx8/XQM5hS44uiG0daUr51CeWi5KDTYlLQNMFN/qtabFRp R+Gg==
X-Received: by 10.180.215.8 with SMTP id oe8mr3433732wic.0.1433031366426; Sat, 30 May 2015 17:16:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:9:400:ac2:bd10:b7c3:b4c:4072? ([2601:9:400:ac2:bd10:b7c3:b4c:4072]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b7sm1598454wjx.47.2015.05.30.17.16.02 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 30 May 2015 17:16:04 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D65AA952-5141-4431-A736-8393A153C888"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5b6
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5569EDCC.2060807@queuefull.net>
Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 17:15:57 -0700
Message-Id: <8C389B91-EC4A-454A-AC72-DA6583238408@gmail.com>
References: <D15A3C14-F268-4CF1-B942-BAE57B281C58@cooperw.in> <556D3AAA-1655-4785-9395-8F6CD0B73E44@vigilsec.com> <5F8F0771-C77B-4D90-811B-501A4EC79268@istaff.org> <893FE3E3-A2DD-40D8-B39F-1EB24DFE1806@vigilsec.com> <97267ED7-D8A2-4A64-AB74-07434190DD89@piuha.net> <CA+9kkMBZq_U+CC5Jzv5T3pL7qasUHSfv-Gu8q4P36+phABXxzg@mail.gmail.com> <4AB120DC-AFB1-4915-B6C5-7417FB989878@piuha.net> <55669A78.3020309@cisco.com> <C8B9D0E8-C363-4618-8941-D0027B86EB7A@piuha.net> <5569EDCC.2060807@queuefull.net>
To: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/piZvFy8JQmBgxQ-OIya3Ebwr0MI>
Cc: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, "ianaplan@ietf.org" <ianaplan@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Time frame inquiry
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: Sun, 31 May 2015 00:16:09 -0000

Benson,

I think the current text is fine and accurately describes our position.  If there are questions, we can answer them.

As I said before, ship it!

Bob

> On May 30, 2015, at 10:05 AM, Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi, Jari.
> 
> Jari Arkko wrote:
>> If the existing agreements between the IETF
>> and ICANN remain in place and the SLAs discussed above are not
>> affected, the IETF​ ransition would take place as described above.
>> That is our preference.
> 
> My instinct is that saying "that is our preference" is too strong. The approach that we've undertaken (updating the MOU with ICANN) is probably the most simple, and perhaps therefore has the lowest risk of disrupting the IETF's use of IANA protocol parameters registry. We should just say that.
> 
> I fear that the proposed text could be interpreted more broadly than we intend. For instance I don't think we wish to imply anything about a preference for the future structure of ICANN, PTI, accountability and stewardship, etc, which are being discussed by other stakeholder groups.
> 
> This is just my personal opinion.
> 
> -Benson
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list
> Ianaplan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan