Subject: [Ianaplan] Adrian Farrel's No Objection on charter-ietf-ianaplan-00-04: (with COMMENT)

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 06:21:24 -0700

Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-ianaplan-00-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-ianaplan/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Notwithstanding that "IETF consensus document" normally means "an RFC on
which there has been IETF last call and where there is consensus for
publication" I feel that
   The IANAPLAN working group is chartered to produce an IETF consensus
   document
needs to be clarified since it leave ambiguity as to whether an RFC is
the intended output. there are three options (pick one!)
- "...that will be published as an RFC"
- "...that may be published as an RFC"
- "...that will be produced as an Internet-Draft and submitted to the
ICANN thingy committee when consensus has been reached."

---

In view of Joel's comment about timeliness, I wonder whether
micro-management through the milestones might be helpful.

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:49:50 -0400

I'd like to see it published as an RFC at the point in time that the proposal is actually submitted to NTIA.

Russ

---

From: JFC Morfin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 19:46:11 +0200

>proposal is actually submitted to NTIA.

+1
However it should be published with the indication that the IETF 
Trust puts it in public domain, or at least authorizes derivative work  .
jfc

>_______________________________________________
>Ianaplan mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 10:42:27 +0300

Yes, I think that is right. But I would like to leave the text as is - with some freedom of interpretation for the chairs.

Jari