Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-06.txt> (Draft Response to the Internet Coordination Group Request for Proposals on the IANA protocol parameters registries) to Informational RFC

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 04/12/2014 06:34, Eliot Lear wrote:
> John,
> 
> On 12/3/14, 6:14 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> It sounds like we want the same thing here, but when I read the draft,
>> I don't see it actually saying that if there's a new IANA operator, we
>> need a new equally good contract. That seems to me to be worth making
>> explicit.
> 
> I think that's a fine suggestion.  The discussions and conclusions of
> the WG, so far as I can tell, were exclusively focused on the ICANN/NTIA
> relationship, and your suggestion reinforces the conclusion by inference
> (we CAN change should the need arise) and it gives people a view as to
> how we would see to the continuity of the service.

Yes, I agree with that and indeed I suspect it is most people's working
assumption, to the extent that we overlooked writing it down ;-).

   Brian