Re: [Internetgovtech] Documents from the ICG Meeting Last Week are Available

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Mon, 21 July 2014 14:31 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.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 828511A004E for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 07:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.141
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.141 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_INFO=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] 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 2H81CAJLRHvo for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 07:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (ow5p.x.rootbsd.net [208.79.81.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B7411A004A for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 07:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (dhcp-bc45.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.188.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7F9CF8A031 for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:31:07 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 10:31:06 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: internetgovtech@iab.org
Message-ID: <20140721143105.GH16966@mx1.yitter.info>
References: <A193D048-2B67-469A-93BA-C61BB362DA75@vigilsec.com> <53CD1E8A.1060804@acm.org> <FA4238C4-ADDC-435F-9591-E3B074C2F6F6@vigilsec.com> <53CD2300.5050307@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53CD2300.5050307@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/internetgovtech/KwOwFzihyrbt-hKw03gyfH0l2PM
Subject: Re: [Internetgovtech] Documents from the ICG Meeting Last Week are Available
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: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:31:13 -0000

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 10:26:08AM -0400, Avri Doria wrote:
> I fund this silo approach very problematic and more likely to produce a
> disjointed set of solutions 

Where would be the joint whereof you speak?  To put this another way,
in my opinion protocol parameters belong squarely in the IETF's
purview, and nobody else's.  Similarly, given the protocols, names
fall squarely into ICANN's purview, no?  What is the "joint" that
wouldn't be better solved (in the case of names) by working within the
ICANN community?  Similarly for number resources, except a different
community.

I don't think there's any handed-down-ness about it.  This is a fully
community-based approach, I think.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com