[CRISP-TEAM] Fwd: Re: [Ianaplan] Question from the ICG
apb at cequrux.com
Wed Feb 11 10:45:36 CET 2015
On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Izumi Okutani wrote:
>As a quick update, all of the CRISP Team members in Singapore as well
>sa both Jari and Russ did not observe any inconsistencies between the
>protocol and numbers proposal.
> IETF: not proposing IPR related issues but not opposing to consider
> the transfer to the IETF trust
> Numbers: It is a must to clarify (through SLA) that IPR does not stay
> with the existing IANA operator.
> IETF Trust is mentioned as one of the accoeptable options and
> simply a preference.
> The transfer of IPR to a particular entity outside does not
> need to happen before the IANA stewardship transition.
The IETF is still discussing whether or not they will oppose.
Informally, indications are that they will not oppose.
> As the next step, we consult with our community on the ianxafer
> list and confirm whether they agree to take the suggested
> approach below:
> - Do not see the need to change the proposal
> - We make a joint statement with the IETF to submit to the
> ICG that we do not observe inconsistencies for the reasons
> explained above
The ICG didn't ask us to work it out, they asked a very specific
"If these aspects of the proposals are perceived as
incompatible would the numbers and protocol parameters
communities be willing to modify their proposals to reconcile
I think the answer to that specific question is "Yes, if there
is an incompatibility then we would be willing to modify the
We can add things like:
- We are aware of discussion within the IETF and we are hopeful that
the IETF will decide that it has no objection to the proposed
transfer of the IANA trademark and IANA.ORG domain name;
- We are also hopeful that the IETF Trust will accept custody of these
properties, if such custody is offered to it;
- In any case, transfer of these properties to the IETF Trust is
merely a suggestion, not a requirement of the numbering community's
- It is important to the numbering community that these properties
be associated with the IANA services, not with any particular
IANA services operator; if that can be achieved in some other
way than by transferring the properties to the IETF Trust,
then that would satisfy the requirements of our proposal.
- Because of all the above, we think there is no incompatibility,
and no need to modify our proposal.
--apb (Alan Barrett)
More information about the CRISP