IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Tue, 18 June 2013 16:54 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9496011E80DF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.541
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.541 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.058, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XvvNOo3WyZkQ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D7B121E8095 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C68892CC66; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:54:09 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Km8dh74NmwPr; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:54:09 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2B32CC53; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:54:09 +0300 (EEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
Subject: Re: IETF, ICANN and Whois (Was Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt> (The Internet Numbers Registry System) to Informational RFC)
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLaZncSO_nnpe0wPgfsEY9zGnCj=N0tE_8MyXZ1gL6re+cA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:54:10 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4357630D-9FF4-4A6E-91E9-4731B02FD4FA@piuha.net>
References: <F14A1FD640A19C37C743AFC2@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <CAL9jLaZncSO_nnpe0wPgfsEY9zGnCj=N0tE_8MyXZ1gL6re+cA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 18 Jun 2013 16:54:20 -0000

Chris: The last call on RFC 2050 bis has ended. The draft will be shortly on the IESG telechat, up for an approval decision and/or suggestion for changes. I personally think it is ready to move forward. That is not to say that we wouldn't take comments, if you have some.

As for the rest of the discussion - I'm sure there are things to be improved in ICANN. I'd suggest though that some of the feedback might be better placed in an ICANN discussion than on IETF list. And is not like there'd be nothing to improve on our side :-) Lets focus on IETF aspects here. For what it is worth, I have limited experience about ICANN, but it has all been very positive.

Jari

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email