Re: [Internetgovtech] Transition to the web

[Miles Fidelman <[e-mail]>]

McTim wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Miles Fidelman
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> On 12/07/2014 11:38, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>>>> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>>> On 12/07/2014 00:27, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
>>>>>> Good points. But I should be clearer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was thinking of IANA as the contracted registry operator for those
>>>>>> IANA considerations in RFCs.
>>>>>> There is a cost to operating this which IETF as far as I am aware is
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> paying for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who is paying?
>>>>> It doesn't matter, unless one side or the other gives notice to cancel
>>>>> the
>>>>> IETF/ICANN MOU.
>>>>>
>>>>> >From a fairness PoV, domain name holders benefit from the existence
>>>>> and viability of IETF protocols - without those protocols, there
>>>>> would be no Internet traffic. So it's entirely reasonable that
>>>>> the cost of the protocol registries is in practice a levy on domain
>>>>> name holders. User pays.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> More than that.. by designating ICANN to perform the IANA functions,
>>>> IETF is essentially granting ICANN an exclusive license to charge for
>>>> those functions.  I.e., IETF may not be paying, but they are providing
>>>> something to ICANN for which ICANN can charge a fee.  (Not that
>>>> different from a franchise agreement.  McDonald's doesn't pay its
>>>> franchisees, the franchisees pay them.)
>>> No we didn't and aren't. Please re-read clauses 4.4 and 4.5 of RFC 2860.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Point taken.
>>
>> So where does the designation of IANA/ICANN as the domain and IP address
>> authority come from, along with the "franchise" to charge for those
>> functions?
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Assigned_Numbers_Authority#History

Not a particularly definitive, or detailed, source.

The model of standards body and designated registration authority is 
pretty well defined one.  For each specific case, how authority has been 
delegated, things get pretty murky.

For IANA (and be reflection ICANN), this all remains just a bit murky 
(at least to me).

Pretty clearly, one set of IANA responsibilities and authorities flow 
from RFC 2680, or rather RFC 2680 documents various practices and 
agreements, and another set from the NTIA contract.  And, as I was 
reminded RFC 2680 excludes domain registration from its scope and 
excludes charging from its scope.

So where, precisely, do the responsibilities for domain registration and 
IP address management come from, along with the authority to charge for 
those services.  By precisely, I mean chapter and verse reference to 
contractual documents (along the lines of "clauses 4.4 and 4.5 of RFC 
2860").

It strikes me that, whatever replaces those clauses, in a post NTIA 
world, is where a responsibility to financially support the full range 
of IANA functions, should be placed; and it's rather critical for this 
not to get overlooked in the transition.  I.e., part of IANA's post-NTIA 
"franchise" to manage domains and addresses should require support of 
the full range of IANA functions.  And, I guess that also raises the 
issue of what happens if, at some future date, IETF decides that the 
IANA functions under its purvue might better be served elsewhere?

Miles Fidelman

-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra