[NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA Stewardship Proposal:First Draft

Izumi Okutani izumi at nic.ad.jp
Tue Dec 30 07:05:49 CET 2014


Dear Andrew,


 > What about any 'rights' to in-addr.arpa and ip6.arpa?  Those two domains
 > are critical to the daily operations of the RIRs.  It would seem at the
 > moment that those domains are held by the IETF, and thus would be
 > covered under the protocols response to the ICG?

in-addr.arpa and ip6.arpa are the name space under ".arpa" TLD, which 
you have correctly observed being held by the IETF.

We have described in our proposal about overlap with the IETF related to 
in-addr.arpa and ip6.arpa in Section I, and CRISP Team is currently 
reviewing whether any additional description is needed.

I hope this clarifies our current status and we'll keep you posted for 
further updates. Thank you for your question.



Regards,
Izumi

On 2014/12/27 1:41, Andrew Dul wrote:
> On 12/20/2014 4:07 AM, Richard Hill wrote:
>> Please see below.
>>
>> Thanks and best,
>> Richard
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: lordmwesh at gmail.com [mailto:lordmwesh at gmail.com]On Behalf Of
>>> Mwendwa Kivuva
>>> Sent: vendredi, 19. d�cembre 2014 10:17
>>> To: rhill at hill-a.ch
>>> Cc: Izumi Okutani; ianaxfer at nro.net
>>> Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA Stewardship
>>> Proposal:First Draft
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19 December 2014 at 11:32, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:
>>>> In the sentence "The agreement would include specific requirements for
>>>> performance and reporting commensurate with current mechanisms, ...", I
>>>> would propose to add intellectual property rights, so that it would read
>>>> "The agreement would include specific requirements for performance and
>>>> reporting, and intellectual property rights, commensurate with current
>>>> mechanisms, ..."
>>>
>>> Hi Richard,
>>>
>>> Can you guide us why we need to add the Intellectual Property Rights
>>> amendment?
>> In my opinion, yhere are two types of intellectual property rights that
>> might be an issue.  The first is sui generis data base rights that ICANN
>> might have regarding the top-level allocations that it publishes.  The
>> second is the use of the IANA trademark and the IANA.ORG domain name.
>>
>> It seems to me that the new contract should cover those issues.
>
> What about any 'rights' to in-addr.arpa and ip6.arpa?  Those two domains
> are critical to the daily operations of the RIRs.  It would seem at the
> moment that those domains are held by the IETF, and thus would be
> covered under the protocols response to the ICG?
>
> Andrew
>
>
>>> To my understanding, IP rights may be between IETF and the
>>> IANA function operator.
>> Yes, there may also be intellectual property rights of interest to the IETF,
>> but that does not mean that there are not rights that may be of interest to
>> the RIRs.
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ianaxfer mailing list
> ianaxfer at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
>




More information about the ianaxfer mailing list