[CRISP-TEAM] Fwd: Re: Draft response/position: IANA IPR issues
apb at cequrux.com
Tue Jan 6 17:42:34 CET 2015
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
> I think I don't fully understand what problem we are trying to
> solve here.
I am trying to ensure that an outgoing IANA operator can't try to
assert any sort of rights over the data that they collected during
the course of their work as the IANA operator.
I am concerned that, if we specifically list the IP and ASN
registries, somebody might argue that the IN-ADDR.ARPA and
IP6.ARPA information is excluded. I'd be equally happy with a
blanket reference to "all related data".
> Do you refer to non-public data related to reverse delegations
> in these domains (e.g. delegation requests, etc.), since DNS
> data is public by nature (to be honest - I have no idea what IPR
> considerations may apply here)?
Public DNS data is often generated from a non-public database.
For example, the public sees the NS records, but the database
probably also includes names and email addresses of designated
> If we are talking about non-public data, there might be an issue
> indeed that we may want to address in the response. This is
> because the US Government has unlimited rights in all data, not
> just public one.
> So we may add:
> "It is also the expectation of the RIR communities that
> non-public information related to the number resource registries
> [and corresponding services, including the provision of reverse
> DNS delegation in IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA] is managed by the
> appropriate organisations."
> Would this address the issue you brought up?
That's very close. I think it still needs something about
transition to a new operator.
--apb (Alan Barrett)
More information about the CRISP