Re: [Internetgovtech] Transition to the web

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Thu, 10 July 2014 17:10 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 148081A0AB4 for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:10:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MANGLED_SMALL=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 B1lkVrcumfeh for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:10:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25DEF1A016D for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.46]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888AB216A3 for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:10:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:10:38 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=date :subject:from:to:cc:message-id:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mesmtp; bh=BMXv/8S361uIdfGPngCl/72Z/Cg=; b=wQD+F+vQzONdA774cpJiGPFT2mfJ a7stu8J9+pEr86Ln48vABft4mzenaAMg7bHKD+2ga4DfZNqEaSucxRwDgsXufUUU adj0wTtDYvif3dvGzPbUpaOrJGUtZd58G9kQqyzcVQBub9EtpvSPFqQJdTN2I4/f rmInKFXMi/xzjEY=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=BMXv/8S361uIdfGPngCl/7 2Z/Cg=; b=DG6i853HAyxBBwYN1Ly6DSCNTuVaOb94wvlFdi45uoWEaD0MVlxbP2 vDxTDVOd1xxyIlr/ZvE8aVvb4bT8o2CPgQzqXvzTnOs68B0+DGMoSjxTBbKleJQI FB9yq3Pm+1526LQSNyGFGZWWnpxe4SF5X9F0sehZQ0eeYbyK58P0o=
X-Sasl-enc: zxOsZ0heJGzNYLcgoag+4wIRNLgDYO6o2/gN9lysjLlJ 1405012237
Received: from [171.68.18.44] (unknown [171.68.18.44]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6E311C007AD; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:10:35 -0400 (EDT)
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:10:31 -0700
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Message-ID: <CFE40C37.46043%alissa@cooperw.in>
Thread-Topic: [Internetgovtech] Transition to the web
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> <53BDA8B3.8050709@meetinghouse.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140710010338.0cde2480@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140710010338.0cde2480@resistor.net>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/internetgovtech/9AjqZbr6vWsdGu9dwEdBrxzBtkQ
Cc: internetgovtech@iab.org
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: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:10:42 -0000

SM, all,

I think there are a few important pending developments to think about:

1. My personal opinion, as I stated at the ICANN50 session on the IANA
stewardship transition, is that it would be reasonable for one of the
roles of the coordination group to be to facilitate communications and
information sharing about the transition plan development process. I hope
this will include (1) a centralized location providing links to all of the
separate mailing lists and discussions that will occur in the IETF, RIR,
ICANN, and other communities about the transition, (2) periodic
summaries/status updates of those discussions, and (3) facilitation of an
over-arching mailing list/venue for transition discussion *if one is
necessary* (opinions might differ as to whether one is necessary if there
already exist sufficient venues for discussion in the separate
communities). However, the CG is still in formation, so it may be a little
while before any of those items get setup. My hope is that they will get
setup, and that once they do the role of the ICANN forum and microsite may
abate as focal points for information or discussion of the transition.

2. I think it would be very helpful for there to be a venue for
names-specific transition issues discussion. There is a cross-community
working group concerning the IANA stewardship transition forming among
some of the ICANN constituencies (kicked off by ccNSO and gNSO — see,
e.g., http://ccnso.icann.org/node/45666). I don’t have enough ICANN
background to fully understand how this group will work, but if it indeed
provides an open forum where any interested party can discuss transition
issues related to names (without agreeing to any sort of bylaws), I think
that will be a good thing. Again, it may take a few more weeks to see if
that can get setup.

So, in summary, I am hopeful that in short order there will be an easy way
to find out where to discuss each of the components of the transition plan
development, that such places will exist for each of the IANA functions
(and an overarching place will exist if that indeed seems useful to
people), and that the discussions that take place will not require
agreement to uphold the bylaws of any particular organization.

Alissa


On 7/10/14, 2:27 AM, "S Moonesamy" <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:

>Hi Alissa, Jari,
>
>I am writing to you as you are the representatives of the IETF in the
>matter of the IANA Transition.
>
>One of the conditions required for participation in the IANA
>Transition discussions is that the person must protect ICANN
>assets.  That decision has been taken by ICANN staff [1][2].  I find
>it extremely difficult to accept that condition.  I am curious about
>whether you agreed to that condition.
>
>Regards,
>S. Moonesamy
>
>1. http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/2014/001111.html
>2. http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/2014/001160.html
>