[CRISP-TEAM] Fwd: Re: Draft response/position: IANA IPR issues
izumi at nic.ad.jp
Tue Jan 6 12:48:55 CET 2015
On 2015/01/06 18:53, Alan Barrett wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2015, Izumi Okutani wrote:
>> To follow up on this -
>> - My current understanding is that this is not an area affected by
>> NTIA's stewardship transition.
>> (IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA second level domains and not a
>> TLD ".arpa")
>> - We already cover the relationship with the IETF on IN-ADDR.ARPA and
>> IP6.ARPA in Section I.
>> Based on this understanding, I'm trying to understand what issues we
>> may have if we don't cover this.
>> If there are no major concerns by not covering this in our proposal I
>> would prefer to focus our resources on other issues.
> Regarding intellectual property rights for IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA
> I still hold the opinion that I stated earlier:
>>> I think that the data associated with managing the subdomains under
>>> IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA domains, should be subject to the same
>>> intellectual property considerations as the data associated with the
>>> allocation or assignment of IPv4 and IPv6 addresses (which is also
>>> reflected in the WHOIS database).
> I would prefer it if we explicitly mention that.
Understood. If you would like to have it reflected, would you send
suggested text so CRISP Team members can take a look?
I note that you are working on other draft texts as well, which I really
It would be helpful if you are able to priority to suggest text on this
and send it in the coming few hours if possible, as we haven't confirmed
clear agreement within CRISP Team to include it.
Andrei had shared a summary to IANAXFER list on IN-ADDR.ARPA and
IP6.ARPA domains, and may be worth seeing whether it is consistent.
If other CRISP Team members have no objections, I don't have an issue
about including it, as long as relationship (or no relationship) with
NTIA is clearly explained.
Thank you Alan, and please let me know if you have any issues with this
More information about the CRISP