IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step

Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> Fri, 28 November 2014 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <mueller@syr.edu>
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 214301A0163 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 08:41:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.209 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 ZpNLEj9LNe52 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 08:41:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1.syr.edu (smtp1.syr.edu [128.230.18.82]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08F3E1A0149 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 08:41:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EX13-MBX-11.ad.syr.edu (ex13-mbx-11.ad.syr.edu [128.230.108.142]) by smtp1.syr.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id sASGfXjR002384 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 28 Nov 2014 11:41:34 -0500
Received: from EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu (128.230.108.144) by EX13-MBX-11.ad.syr.edu (128.230.108.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.847.32; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 11:41:15 -0500
Received: from EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu ([128.230.108.144]) by EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu ([128.230.108.144]) with mapi id 15.00.0847.030; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 11:41:15 -0500
From: Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>
To: Richard Hill <rhill@hill-a.ch>, John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org>
Thread-Topic: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step
Thread-Index: AQHQCyiC1go3tQw6R0+Rc26a6EP6NZx2PcwQ
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 16:41:14 +0000
Message-ID: <8503159c49e14990b2dda4f95f169045@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
References: <gk9vp636b67s93tt70wbtwew.1417192181318@email.android.com>
In-Reply-To: <gk9vp636b67s93tt70wbtwew.1417192181318@email.android.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [71.115.134.175]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_8503159c49e14990b2dda4f95f169045EX13MBX13adsyredu_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.13.68, 1.0.33, 0.0.0000 definitions=2014-11-28_07:2014-11-28,2014-11-28,1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1402240000 definitions=main-1411280169
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/vZpv-eC-zFuk98Rj419tUaLhjEs
Cc: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, "ianaplan@ietf.org" <ianaplan@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step
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: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 16:41:40 -0000

“However in the absence of the NTIA contract a few new arrangements may be needed in order to ensure the IETF community's expectations are met.”

Weak, admittedly, but it’s there.

From: Ianaplan [mailto:ianaplan-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hill
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 11:30 AM
To: Milton L Mueller; John Curran
Cc: Marc Blanchet; Jari Arkko; ianaplan@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step

What language in the draft "indicate(s) that changes do need to be made post-NTIA"?

Best Richard


Sent from Samsung Mobile.

-------- Original message --------
From: Milton L Mueller
Date:28/11/2014 17:23 (GMT+01:00)
To: John Curran , rhill@hill-a.ch<mailto:rhill@hill-a.ch>
Cc: Marc Blanchet , Jari Arkko , ianaplan@ietf.org<mailto:ianaplan@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step


> -----Original Message-----

> The draft does
> doesn't preclude stronger legal/contractual measures, but it also does not
> note such as a specific requirement for future IANA arrangements.

This is my understanding, too. The fact that the draft doesn't preclude these measures and has been modified to indicate that changes do need to be made post-NTIA is what ultimately makes the draft (roughly) acceptable to me.

> Adding stronger legal/contractual arrangements as a requirement was
> discussed at length, and it was apparent that accommodating that change in
> the document would actually reduce the level of consensus

Without commenting on the validity or lack thereof of the arguments against more specific legal/contractual requirements, I think this also accurately reflects the situation.

Milton L Mueller
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org


_______________________________________________
Ianaplan mailing list
Ianaplan@ietf.org<mailto:Ianaplan@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email