Subject: [Ianaplan] IANA transition and US government budget

From: "Richard Hill" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 09:10:19 +0200

According to a blog post that I saw, the US Congress has again stated in the
approved budget for the Federal Government that NTIA cannot spend any money
on the IANA transition, and this until August 2017.

1) Does anybody on this list know if the above is correct?

2) Does anybody on this list know whether that would prevent the transition
from taking place in 2016?

Thanks and best,
Richard

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 23 May 2016 17:53:08 -0000

>1) Does anybody on this list know if the above is correct?

It is not.

There's an anti-transition rider in the current funding bill in the
House for the Commerce Dept, but that is a long way from being
approved.

Marco Rubio is circulating an anti-transition letter in the Senate,
but now that he's not running for president any more, he's just
another first term senator with no seniority, sort of like Ted Cruz
but not as personally unpopular.

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/280354-republicans-continue-attempts-to-delay-internet-domain-handoff

If you're not familar with The Hill (no relation, I expect) it is the
gossip sheet that everyone in DC reads.  It's usually pretty accurate.

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 08:46:59 +1200

> from taking place in 2016?

Even if it happened, I don't see why the transition needs even one penny
of USG money. If so, what am I missing?

    Brian

---

From: Miles Fidelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 17:27:35 -0400

> of USG money. If so, what am I missing?

NTIA has to review and approve the transition, otherwise IANA continues 
to operate under contract to the USG or things go into a really strange 
limbo.

Miles Fidelman

-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 10:49:45 +1200

On 24/05/2016 09:27, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> NTIA has to review and approve the transition, otherwise IANA continues to operate under contract to the USG or things go into a
> really strange limbo.

I'm quite sure that a review can be performed without needing a line in the budget.

    Brian

---

From: SM <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 16:09:10 -0700

Hi Brian,
>I'm quite sure that a review can be performed without needing a line 

It is about the how "spending government funds" is interpreted.

Regards,
-sm

---

From: Miles Fidelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 19:11:19 -0400

> I'm quite sure that a review can be performed without needing a line in the budget.

I'm pretty sure that "cannot spend any money" includes "can not allocate 
staff time" or "travel related to the transition," "pay outside 
contractors" etc. - at least if one wants to quibble about it.  And 
there does seem to be some quibbling going on.  Kind of depends on the 
exact language of the riders buried in the appropriations bills.

Miles Fidelman

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 24 May 2016 00:42:41 -0000

>I'm quite sure that a review can be performed without needing a line in the budget.

The proposed amendments forbid NTIA to spend any money at all on the
transition.

US government agencies take this kind of stuff very seriously; when
the government shuts down while the Congreess is playing budget
brinkmanship they have to be very careful not to do anything that
might be considered work.

---

From: Seun Ojedeji <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 08:41:34 +0100

Hi,

Can't seem to get a hold on the url right now but I think NTIA already
contracted an institute to review the submitted proposal and provide
recommendation. There was an amount allocated for that project, so one
wonders where NTIA would make such payment if it's not already budgeted for.

Regards

Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 24 May 2016 1:43 a.m., "John Levine" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> to operate under contract to the USG or things go into a
> >> really strange limbo.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan
>

---

From: Narelle <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 07:44:12 +0000

When a government contract is terminated, even at its natural conclusion,
activities are involved in aquitting the contract. There will be all sorts
of validation requirements just to make sure you got the service over the
contracted period. It all depends on the contract and the environment
within which it operates.

Of course YMMV. Different Federalisms - different processes but you can bet
that since there is bureaucracy there will be requisite process.

Narelle