Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] control and negotiation (was Re: draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call)

From: Richard Hill <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 07:02:30 +0100

In my experience, the more precise the brief from the client, the better the result from the lawyer.

Best Richard

Sent from Samsung Mobile.

<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]> </div><div>Date:05/11/2014  06:50  (GMT+01:00) </div><div>To: Miles Fidelman <[email-masked]> </div><div>Cc: [email-masked] </div><div>Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] control and negotiation (was Re:
  draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-02 working group last call) </div><div>
</div>On 05/11/2014 14:22, Miles Fidelman wrote:

> - the WG charter has excluded a bunch of topics that one would expect to
> see in a complete response to the ICG RFP - particularly legal and
> contractual stuff

We are not lawyers. We have legal counsel who have served us well when
legal documents were needed, but when we try to write down legal stuff
ourselves we end up writing stupidities. That's why, some years ago,
we delegated legal and contractual stuff to the IAOC, and IPR stuff
to the IETF Trust, both of which use legal counsel as needed.

I don't object to the draft saying in general terms that the IETF
will continue to delegate legal and contractual stuff in this way.
But beyond this, we have ample evidence from experience that, as
engineers, we should keep our fingers out of this fire.

   Brian

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