Re: [Internetgovtech] IANA changes process

IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org> Wed, 09 April 2014 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <chair@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6A471A0392 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 08:06:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable
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 Bhk1UsVrm2at for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 08:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::28]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F8521A0391 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 08:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9E481E41DE; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 08:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c9a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id okPg9MpBkdOp; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 08:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.156.44.192] (unknown [192.165.183.201]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 164F21E40EF; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 08:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
Subject: Re: [Internetgovtech] IANA changes process
From: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <534540DD.20107@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 17:06:17 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D4407F3D-D963-4E5D-AB18-B3A4AAC088C8@ietf.org>
References: <D272A88D-B935-4BAE-A649-13815E5896D3@ietf.org> <14E4E6DE-CACF-4057-9308-49BC980A5197@ietf.org> <534540DD.20107@cisco.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/PDkx3j92Q7Vz4Rs9zkNH-6ecfsM
Cc: "internetgovtech@iab.org" <internetgovtech@iab.org>, "ietf@ietf.org List" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 15:06:25 -0000

Eliot,

> While I appreciate your measured tones, you may have understated the
> situation in this case.  Two things are being proposed that require
> careful consideration. 

I am sorry if I was unclear. This is indeed very important, and, yes, as you point out there are multiple aspects, both the process and the scope. 

The process is here: http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/transition/draft-proposal-08apr14-en.htm
And the scope here: http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/iana-transition-scoping-08apr14-en.pdf

I expect the IAB and its IANA program to lead the preparation of response(s), but nevertheless, community discussion of the topic would be very helpful as well.

Jari