Comments on: The IETF on the RFI for IANA services http://patrick.vande-walle.eu/internet/the-ietf-on-the-rfi-for-iana-services/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-ietf-on-the-rfi-for-iana-services Random thoughts about the Internet and life Wed, 04 Jan 2012 19:33:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Administrator http://patrick.vande-walle.eu/internet/the-ietf-on-the-rfi-for-iana-services/comment-page-1/#comment-54 Administrator Thu, 09 Mar 2006 07:57:28 +0000 http://patrick.vandewalle.net/2006/03/08/the-ietf-on-the-rfi-for-iana-services/#comment-54 Update: one kind reader pointed out that the IAB does not say that the function should be moved under the IETF/ISOC umbrella, which is right. It does say however that "[...]the IETF established the IETF Administrative Support Activity housed within the Internet Society (ISOC) [...] The IASA is the home of all IETF-related operational agreements [...] including the IETF technical parameter assignment function", which is a polite way to say that this part is under the responsibility of the IETF and that the DoC does not have to include that part in the RFI process. The third paragraph still holds true, however. The DoC has repeatedly overplayed its role in the past and it is not sure it will listen to the IETF this time. Additionally, I would consider that what applies to the procotol assignment function would apply <em>mutatis mutandis</em> to the IP address allocation and domain name system functions as well, as they also were also subcontracted by the IETF to the IANA. Which means in short that ICANN should have a contract with the IETF for the IANA and root zone file editing functions, not with the DoC. Update: one kind reader pointed out that the IAB does not say that the function should be moved under the IETF/ISOC umbrella, which is right. It does say however that “[...]the IETF established the IETF Administrative Support Activity housed within the Internet Society (ISOC) [...] The IASA is the home of all IETF-related operational agreements [...] including the IETF technical parameter assignment function”, which is a polite way to say that this part is under the responsibility of the IETF and that the DoC does not have to include that part in the RFI process.

The third paragraph still holds true, however. The DoC has repeatedly overplayed its role in the past and it is not sure it will listen to the IETF this time.

Additionally, I would consider that what applies to the procotol assignment function would apply mutatis mutandis to the IP address allocation and domain name system functions as well, as they also were also subcontracted by the IETF to the IANA.

Which means in short that ICANN should have a contract with the IETF for the IANA and root zone file editing functions, not with the DoC.

]]>