Re: I-D Action: draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-19.txt

Brian E Carpenter <> Wed, 11 January 2017 02:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E090129590; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:12:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V3qcK4gjpKzb; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:12:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 172E912947D; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:12:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id y143so35898211pfb.0; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:12:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XMygFj+I/NZGhs95AgVDIoLpgB+KRlgTslohuy5tSTs=; b=Il/0lpiYoJxUw8ZNUrKiEydeC9nVxkm0gjTFYpkj6m7tiaWtSW7Tl/bj6Zq7E17BgM Mk35p/OsQWeH1agjbF4R7Hx7YBVflGKF1bqzn66c9m0jTPpyLNysJA0BtvUz9Oknw2GI FAXvmdWZYOzFhjzb3M7HdosBRjLFJqmybwQV+Cq17PuHhaNmPZJ67mnniW5REoVLQYAa K9zJ6swn2xur/VVi/9HBGvTLfyHtkrx3vQUaIx0awxU46vlYj3JVqelpOb0UyranMybb 3+Rf141p5MpKpjTdy8V2rg2PBgY6bfxePsh7HuLXGD8FniQAbsfLPp7W36Bo1xut4+Lb vOkQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=XMygFj+I/NZGhs95AgVDIoLpgB+KRlgTslohuy5tSTs=; b=DgvsBPKpEe80AoA/WuhoaeQuF+vIjqYdHfzxUcDz75/GY3MUkJMcoMpH+gHGJY6Qut fw8opmf2s+58buVjfjhmK8aNy06dZeCyhmOsmklLPQNSn4sFkoc/C8vCQgRspShZgS/F z8E0OuWs4cHnxkLxOKTgzCchsRxXF+W3IBCHNTckGhVgfcHISJHhppB+Z6sk8zs0iaGZ yTKUCgmsEMEAiMAlXHypE2UsgYq0jufb/B83zhJ8CTPLAX+2e0L/jfyJGctMDoz2bR4W 66ZuNmcORyaDHB/B96O52Y38Mkq5zrYwyK6S1RFnAZk0576cd6ofpI4Wi6B+Bk/D3b9S FPDg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXICkxif/UxAHPkvdxnGEMLvGMyqo2pkWLkTZNPJEwl0NqbQOlFu9jytDtFbuQ1NLA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id d127mr7650633pgc.52.1484100767677; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:12:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:575f:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:575f:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by with ESMTPSA id e11sm8743787pgp.10.2017. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:12:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-19.txt
To: Bob Hinden <>, Andrew Sullivan <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 15:12:46 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Cc: IETF Trustees <>, IETF <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 02:12:50 -0000

On 11/01/2017 11:57, Bob Hinden wrote:
> While I am certainly not a trademark lawyer, I would think that if the last sentence in the first paragraph of Introduction in the draft is changed to:
>     For IETF protocols, that role is filled by the Internet Assigned Numbers
>     Authority (IANA) Services [RFC2860] described in this document as IANA.
> I would think this is not a trademark violation, since it is clear what IANA is referring to.

Regardless, we must not issue a document with such absurd, ugly and ungrammatical
phrasing. It would make us a laughing stock.

> _We_ do not own the IANA trademark.  The IETF Trust does. 

Don't care. Ultimately the Trust does what the IETF tells it to do. I understand
that lawyers sometimes give very cautious advice, but it's our choice whether
we take that advice after due consideration. Making this document read absurdly
is simply not OK. Putting in some introductory legalese is OK.