nanog mailing list archives

Re: US to relinquish control of Internet


From: Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster () mykolab com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 11:41:23 -0700

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On a related note, another great way to keep track of new ICANN
registry agreements is the gTLD Tech mailing list:

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-tech

...and the gTLD Notification list:

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtldnotification

I have found both to be quite informative.

$.02,

- - ferg



On 3/19/2014 12:51 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:

Patrick:

On 3/15/14, 12:42 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
(As if the US has "control" anyway....)

It's all over the "popular press", strange I haven't seen it
here.

<http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/200889-us-to-relinquish-internet-control>


<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition-key-internet-domain-name-functions>
<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-14mar14-en.htm>


<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-14mar14-en.htm>
<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-14mar14-en.htm>



Etc., etc.

It's nice of the DoC to "relinquish" control, but I really don't
see it changing much other than quieting down some hype from
countries that were saying they were pissed at the US for
"controlling" the Internet. And I couldn't really see those
countries doing anything about it unless the US did something
actually bad, which they wouldn't do IMHO.

Was I being a pollyanna?


How things change is up to every person in the community.
Operators are an incredibly important part of the Internet
ecosystem.  Some questions you might want to ask yourself:

1.  What is the current legal framework for the IANA functions 
contract?  If you don't know it, it's a good time to learn, if you
are interested. 2.  How does it impact operators? 3.  What do
operators want out of the evolution that is likely to take place?

Discussions are taking place now in a few fora, including on the
IAB's internetgovtech mailing list[1], where the focus has largely
been on protocol parameters, one of the IANA pillars.  Olaf Kolkman
has written a very interesting draft draft-iab-iana-framework[2]
that gives you at least one view  on how to think about the
problem.  The IETF has some draft principles that are being knocked
around.[3]  There is a separate 1net mailing list[4] in which
mostly the ICANN component is being discussed.  Also, there will be
meetings, the ICANN one starting on Friday in Singapore, as but one
example where this topic will be discussed in person.  I'm going to
hazard a guess that the RIRs will also be discussing this, both on
lists and in person.  Assuredly other governments are paying
attention.

While I speak only for myself in this email, I will also point out
that Cisco did make a statement about the NTIA announcement.[5]  So
have others.

Eliot

[1] https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech [2]
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-iana-framework-01 [3]
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg12562.html


[4] http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[5] 
http://blogs.cisco.com/gov/cisco-supports-u-s-department-of-commerce-decision-to-transition-internet-management-functions/







- -- 
Paul Ferguson
VP Threat Intelligence, IID
PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlMsh9MACgkQKJasdVTchbK6lAD/Y490eHIfDUE8uBGCvyzYsc7x
zH8VDmDqfGHeZHJ3mTIA/iI1Sw5CX1MFnJHXoiRfSCm+vEz04lNbUoM9gtHpYawE
=Li5v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Current thread: