IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Split the IANA functions?

John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org> Tue, 07 January 2014 00:16 UTC

Return-Path: <jcurran@istaff.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 D96D41AE391 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 16:16:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 ohs2j_66NhLe for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 16:16:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org (mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org [204.13.248.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE821AE390 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 16:16:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pool-108-45-30-69.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([108.45.30.69] helo=[192.168.1.9]) by mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jcurran@istaff.org>) id 1W0KLV-000Dj5-Uk; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 00:16:38 +0000
X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn
X-Originating-IP: 108.45.30.69
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX19AhXJxrX3c/J+9OR1JNySC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
Subject: Re: Split the IANA functions?
From: John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwgOCn8rF3ui6JBgskKe411tNbP98D8hYx9ZbicYZv5Cuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 19:16:35 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4ED70504-868E-460E-988D-4758D57DEA6C@istaff.org>
References: <CAMm+LwinAb6+7BoMzwBWyu63vofndxK9VY6DSNN0Ykza4SxuMQ@mail.gmail.com> <52CB0010.5010407@gmail.com> <CAMm+LwhN8+z9q4KQXVY9bWA6TAqxx1=Qg0OUfK=VGCSDg5uWEA@mail.gmail.com> <DD618936-0D13-41F1-8D89-2E3171D864B5@istaff.org> <CAMm+LwgOCn8rF3ui6JBgskKe411tNbP98D8hYx9ZbicYZv5Cuw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing 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: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 00:16:52 -0000

On Jan 6, 2014, at 5:58 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> wrote:

> The question that should be asked is why the IETF gets targeted in the way W3C and OASIS do not. I think that the confusion of the IETF role in all things ICANN is the main reason.

You keep making that assertion, and I'll agree that the IETF is targeted more frequently
because of the policy aspects of its work.  That doesn't mean governments don't watch
the policy aspects of W3C (e.g. DNT), only that much less of that work has public policy
implications, and hence there are less mutual encounters.

Note - the other reason that IP and DNS names get more attention is because there are 
international treaty organizations which operate in apparently similar spaces, i.e. it's not
necessarily the result of actual interest by governments in the public policy implications 
of the IETF's work, but an expression of inter-organanization dynamics.  The W3C has 
not been honored with having any helpful friends similar in nature to the ITU and WIPO.

FYI,
/John

Disclaimer: My views alone.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email