[NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA Stewardship Proposal: Final Call for Comments

Richard Hill rhill at hill-a.ch
Sat Jan 10 10:40:15 CET 2015

Please see one comment below.

Thanks and best,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Izumi Okutani [mailto:izumi at nic.ad.jp]
> Sent: vendredi, 9. janvier 2015 17:09
> To: rhill at hill-a.ch; ianaxfer at nro.net
> Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA
> Stewardship Proposal: Final Call for Comments

> > Regarding III.A.1, on some of the RIR lists there was some support for
> > moving the numbers part of the IANA function to the NRO (which could
> > subcontract it to one of the RIRs, or whatever).  Apparently
> there was not
> > sufficient support in CRISP to pursue that option. But I think that some
> > mention should be made of it, together with an explanation of why that
> > option was not pursued (other than "we are satisfied with ICANN's
> > performance to date").
> The element where support was confirmed in all RIR regions was stability
> and continuity of the IANA operation, which makes it important that we
> continue with the current IANA operator, which is functioning in term of
> stability as well.

As I've pointed out before, the top-level IP address block allocations
published on the IANA web site have not always been up to date.  At present,
016/8 is still shown as allocated to Digital Equipment Corporation, when in
fact it has been transferred to Hewlett Packard, as correctly shown in the


Given that correct allocation information is found in the RIR WHOIS, I think
that some explanation is needed regarding the value-added of the present
IANA function, and how continuing it contributes to stability.


More information about the ianaxfer mailing list