Re: [Internetgovtech] Transition to the web

JFC Morfin <jefsey@jefsey.com> Sat, 12 July 2014 09:58 UTC

Return-Path: <jefsey@jefsey.com>
X-Original-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB5AE1B2A5E for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 02:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.631
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, MISSING_MID=0.497] autolearn=no
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 wSL75xxZyejE for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 02:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from host.presenceweb.org (host.presenceweb.org [67.222.106.46]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA4511B27B9 for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 02:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 254.74.14.81.rev.sfr.net ([81.14.74.254]:56901 helo=GHM-SAM.dot.dj) by host.presenceweb.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <jefsey@jefsey.com>) id 1X5u4B-0001Pn-9n; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 02:58:03 -0700
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 11:24:34 +0200
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, cdel@firsthand.net
From: JFC Morfin <jefsey@jefsey.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140711073822.0dfffea0@elandnews.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140708142055.0d5fbb78@elandnews.com> <D1AC4482BED7C04DAC43491E9A9DBEC3998608C6@BK-EXCHMBX01.blacknight.local> <20140709161653.GM59034@mx1.yitter.info> <9B506E73B33873103AE5EC52@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <20140709171401.GB2935@mx1.yitter.info> <53BD843F.1070304@cs.tcd.ie> <53BD84BB.7000002@meetinghouse.net> <53BDA867.7090701@gmail.com> <53BE602F.7020108@firsthand.net> <53BE6384.5030504@cs.tcd.ie> <53BE69D2.9070509@firsthand.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140711000259.0cc016e8@resistor.net> <53BFD828.3070007@firsthand.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140711073822.0dfffea0@elandnews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - host.presenceweb.org
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - iab.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: host.presenceweb.org: authenticated_id: intl+dot.dj/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/internetgovtech/vSQRO7XmgnkZfDovo7Hv_TM_M78
Cc: internetgovtech@iab.org, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Subject: Re: [Internetgovtech] Transition to the web
X-BeenThere: internetgovtech@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Governance and IETF technical work <internetgovtech.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.iab.org/mail-archive/web/internetgovtech/>
List-Post: <mailto:internetgovtech@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 09:58:08 -0000
X-Message-ID:
Message-ID: <20140712095812.25147.66449.ARCHIVE@ietfa.amsl.com>

Is there somewhere a IANA budget document or tax declaration so to 
understand better and the figures involved?
jfc

At 18:08 11/07/2014, S Moonesamy wrote:
>Hi Christian,
>At 05:27 11-07-2014, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
>>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 is a fact that ICANN is paying for the cost of running the 
>protocol registry.
>
>>Does gov.us define this as part of its contract with ICANN for 
>>IANA? Is it a cost that is being cross subsidised in the round from 
>>overall revenue flows at ICANN?
>
>This part is not clear.  The government of the United States 
>believes that it is part of the IANA contract.  In the past the IETF 
>has timidly expressed its view that the protocol registry is an IETF 
>thing.  On the wrong side of the equator this is known as cross-subsidization.
>
>>Does IETF pay into this pool?
>
>No.
>
>>What happens when the overlying terms from gov.us for IANA contract 
>>comes to an end from IETF perspective? Working through these issues 
>>and being clear how IETF is able to exert what it wants from IANA 
>>registry functions is what I mean by IETF needing to take initiative.
>
>The corporation can decide to ask the IETF to pay.  My advice to the 
>IETF Chair might be "tell them that the IETF is not going to pay for 
>this".  I think that is clear enough. :-)
>
>Regards,
>S. Moonesamy
>
>_______________________________________________
>Internetgovtech mailing list
>Internetgovtech@iab.org
>https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech