Re: IETF, ICANN and Whois (Was Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt> (The Internet Numbers Registry System) to Informational RFC)

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

John,

> For the record, I still believe that 2050bis should be
> published.  Regardless of what I think of some of the things it
> says, I think it is reasonably reflective of reality and that
> reality is always worth documenting.

Thanks.

> As to my more general comments, they were not really addressed
> to 2050bis and I have no desire to start a discussion of them
> here.  However, some assertions about how well ICANN is working
> were made on this list by people who do not usually participate
> actively in IETF's technical work.  In part because some ICANN
> decisions and behaviors does affect the fate of IETF protocols
> and the state of the Internet generally,

Ok. Understood.

> I would welcome a discussion (definitely somewhere
> else) about that difference in perceptions … That would
> include an offlist discussion of why your perceptions and mine
> may differ should you find such a discussion useful.

Fair enough. Hopefully some of that could be fed into ICANN as well.

(I should probably have indicated that my experience is very limited. I didn't want to indicate that there are no challenges - I know there are.)

Jari