<p dir="ltr">On the ietf list it's been discussed whether the IETF could pull the contract[1] for all the registries, which makes a lot of sense</p>
<p dir="ltr">Cheers!<br>
1. Although I expect that it won't be a term based type.<br><br></p>
<p dir="ltr">sent from Google nexus 4<br>
kindly excuse brevity and typos.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: "Seun Ojedeji" <<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>><br>Date: 25 Sep 2014 05:52<br>Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Summary/refinement of scenarios discussed so far (was Constructive redirect -- focusing discussions)<br>To: "Brian E Carpenter" <<a href="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com">brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com</a>><br>Cc: "Andrew Sullivan" <<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>>, "John Curran" <<a href="mailto:jcurran@istaff.org">jcurran@istaff.org</a>>, <<a href="mailto:ianaplan@ietf.org">ianaplan@ietf.org</a>><br><br type="attribution"><p dir="ltr">This response to John's critical question hits me as a jackpot! Hopefully we'd then focus on such contract content</p>
<p dir="ltr">Cheers!</p>
<p dir="ltr">sent from Google nexus 4<br>
kindly excuse brevity and typos.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 25 Sep 2014 01:06, "Brian E Carpenter" <<a href="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com" target="_blank">brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 25/09/2014 11:22, John Curran wrote:<br>
> On Sep 24, 2014, at 7:13 PM, Andrew Sullivan <<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" target="_blank">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> this "these spaces" claim is not actually correct: the IETF ois not<br>
>> making an entry inside a space delegated to someone else or making<br>
>> policy inside someone else's space, but is instead drawing the<br>
>> boundaries where different policy actors reside.<br>
><br>
> Understood. My question was different... Does the IETF take responsibility<br>
> for arranging for IANA registry services for all of the IANA registries (a<br>
> contract which would say, just as RFC 2860, that there are other sources of<br>
> policy for some spaces), or do the RIRs and ICANN need to also contract for<br>
> IANA services for their respective portions of these spaces?<br>
<br>
Now that's a good question. I'm thinking that if a parameter space<br>
was created by IETF action (or by the IETF's predecessors, since there<br>
are things here that date back before 1986) then logically the IETF should<br>
contract for the *existence* of the whole registry, even if some parts<br>
of the registry are no longer populated under IETF technical direction.<br>
But I don't think the IETF should be held responsible for the *contents*<br>
of those parts of the registry. (IANAL, so I will not attempt to discuss<br>
how this should be expressed in formal language.)<br>
<br>
Brian<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ianaplan mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ianaplan@ietf.org" target="_blank">Ianaplan@ietf.org</a><br>
<a href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan" target="_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</div>