[address-policy-wg] 2011-01 New Policy Proposal (Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 mechanisms by the IANA)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-01 New Policy Proposal (Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 mechanisms by the IANA)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-01 New Policy Proposal (Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 mechanisms by the IANA)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hannigan, Martin
marty at akamai.com
Mon Mar 21 18:32:15 CET 2011
On 3/21/11 1:22 PM, "Gert Doering" <gert at space.net> wrote: > HI, > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 04:48:33PM +0000, boggits wrote: >> On 21 March 2011 16:43, Emilio Madaio <emadaio at ripe.net> wrote: >> >>> We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to >>> <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 18 April 2011. >> >> Since we've had a joyful time with this proposal before, > > It's actually a new and revised one :-) - which purposely only covers > global policy, and none of the fun bits about local rules for returning > address space or transfers. It does, but it seems to be more of a tossing of a political football than an effort to find a common ground. There are other aspects of this proposal that have been deemed unacceptable previously. >> what happens if we pass it *but* ICANN fail to get the IANA contract >> this time round? > > Since the proposal doesn't actually talk that much about *ICANN* (except > for initial adoption of this policy), I'm not sure if we have a problem > here - if the ICANN function is moved elsewhere, this policy will go with > it. The agreements that put the global policy process into action are specifically linked to ICANN: http://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/2004/10/aso-mou-signed.pdf I don't know if these are transferable, would be transferred, or would be accepted as part of a function transfer. I guess that would be dealt with in any follow-up RFP to facilitate a transfer of the functions -- if that's what happens. > > The only problematic bit is timing, that is, we take half a year to > finish reaching consensus, and right in the middle the IANA function > is no longer at ICANN. When is the contract renewal due? > Or two years. It could get quite confusing to have something in process and have a major change occur such as the moving of the IANA function. Best, -M<
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-01 New Policy Proposal (Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 mechanisms by the IANA)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-01 New Policy Proposal (Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 mechanisms by the IANA)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]