Re: [Internetgovtech] Cross community

[Eric Burger <[e-mail]>]

I would offer John’s scenario is not totally made up, in that something similar already happened. The real situation provides proof that we can work with ICANN. What I am thinking of is the SLD block list. That was a community effort, recognized reality, and brought ICANN, IETF, manufacturers, ISP, etc. together to work through the problem. So, I am not desirous of formalizing some sort of process that might have worked for the last war (SLD’s, or gTLD collisions) when the next war is something completely different. I am OK with our informal relationship, as ICANN has shown it can work with us, and we have shown we can work with ICANN.


On Jul 25, 2014, at 7:47 AM, Steve Crocker <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Jul 25, 2014, at 7:29 AM, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>>> ICANN is working on a new round of gTLDs or some such. Of course they
>>> exclude already reserved TLDs, but not stuff that might be coming up
>>> (because they don't know it).
>> 
>> That's already a failure of coordination.
> 
> I don’t understand the basis for the above statements.
> 
> ICANN has not yet begun formulating the next round of gTLDs.  As part of the process, there will be consultation on what issues arose during the first round.  Consultation with the IETF re current and future reserved names is definitely and obviously part of what needs to be included.
> 
> There are multiple avenues of coordination between the IETF and ICANN.  The coordination is broad and deep.  Some of it is structural and some is pragmatic.  It is ongoing and effective.  The last important incident of uncoordinated activity that I’m aware was in another dimension entirely, viz the scheduling of meetings, and that was dealt with quite firmly.
> 
> Steve
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Internetgovtech mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech