Re: [tlp-interest] Proposed Policy on Rights in IANA Parameter Registry Data

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 21-Sep-20 09:50, John Levine wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I support this in general, but have a few comments:
>>
>> 1) I would like to be reassured that ICANN has no problems with this. It seems quite consistent with history and
>> current practice, but ICANN actually operates the IANA service and the public registries, so I don't think we can
>> declare the policy without informing them.
> 
> Good point.  We've sent this to PTI and asked them if they have any concerns.
> 
>> 2) I believe that the text should note that most domain registrations are not concerned by this, but that the
>> "technical" domain registrations are. And the same applies to the "specialised" address block assignments. We
>> surely "own" names like .localhost., example.com, in-addr.arpa and address blocks like 64:ff9b:1::/48.
> 
> This is about the parameters in the protocol registry. That includes
> the names in Special-Use Domain Names registry but we don't treat that any
> differently than any other registry.

Yes, agreed, but mentioning this is in the "avoidance of doubt" category.
 
> For IP addresses the tables mix stuff we've reserved and stuff IANA
> has allocated and I would not want try to pick apart who does (not)
> own what there.

Indeed it is a bit mixed up, and copyright of actual numbers, whether
binary, decimal or hexdecimal is a nonsense anyway. I must confess that
I can't invent sensible wording about this.

Regards
    Brian


> 
> R's,
> John
> 
>