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)

Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Wed, 19 June 2013 06:25 UTC

Return-Path: <paf@frobbit.se>
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 2960321F9EAF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 23:25:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 d7Nr9zf4iu3o for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 23:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.frobbit.se (mail.frobbit.se [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffe::176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E7321F9EAD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 23:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1::95cc:691e:3338:5ca2] (unknown [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:0:95cc:691e:3338:5ca2]) by mail.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C6870219D6; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:25:10 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
Subject: Re: IETF, ICANN and Whois (Was Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt> (The Internet Numbers Registry System) to Informational RFC)
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <4357630D-9FF4-4A6E-91E9-4731B02FD4FA@piuha.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:25:10 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D6B2DDFE-1C83-4FD0-9646-576F2F437239@frobbit.se>
References: <F14A1FD640A19C37C743AFC2@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <CAL9jLaZncSO_nnpe0wPgfsEY9zGnCj=N0tE_8MyXZ1gL6re+cA@mail.gmail.com> <4357630D-9FF4-4A6E-91E9-4731B02FD4FA@piuha.net>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, 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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 06:25:12 -0000

On 18 jun 2013, at 18:54, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> wrote:

> 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.

I think this is the correct strategy, BUT, I see as a very active participant in ICANN (chair of SSAC) that work in ICANN could be easier if some "more" technical standards where developed in IETF, and moved forward along standards track, that ICANN can reference. Same with some epp-related issues, and also DNS-related, which I must admit I think has stalled in the IETF. When that happens, ICANN start to "invent" or at least discuss IETF related issues -- which I think is non optimal. But on the other hand, if IETF do not move forward, then what should ICANN do?

I will btw be the first few days (until including Tuesday or so) at IETF in Berlin and am happy to discuss this issue with anyone interested.

   Patrik Fältström
   Chair SSAC, ICANN

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email