Skip to main content
  • Stepping towards a Sustainable Internet

    The IAB’s new Environmental Impacts of Internet Technology (E-Impact) program will hold its first virtual interim meeting over two slots on 15 and 16 February 2024. These interim meetings are open to participation, and we invite all interested community members to join, participate, and contribute.

    • Jari ArkkoE-Impact Program Lead
    • Suresh KrishnanE-Impact Program Lead
    7 Feb 2024
  • What’s the deal with Media Over QUIC?

    In 2022, the IETF formed a working group for Media Over QUIC (MoQ)—a media delivery solution that has the potential to transform how we send and receive media during live streaming, real-time collaboration, gaming, and more.

    • Brett BralleyThought Leadership Content Writer, Cisco
    25 Jan 2024
  • IETF Administration LLC 2024 Budget

    The IETF Administration LLC has finalised its budget for 2024.

    • Jay DaleyIETF Executive Director
    18 Jan 2024
  • Update on the IT Infrastructure Transition Project

    Begun in the last quarter of 2023, work is underway to define and deploy a new, cloud-based infrastructure approach for services that support the work of the IETF, and to move those services onto the new infrastructure.

    • Robert SparksIETF Tools Project Manager
    12 Jan 2024
  • Internet Society Extends Financial Support to the IETF

    An extended agreement with the Internet Society will continue providing major financial support to the IETF through March 2029.

    • Jason LivingoodIETF Administration LLC Board Chair
    10 Jan 2024

Filter by topic and date

Filter by topic and date

Plan for IANA

  • Jari ArkkoIETF Chair

25 Jul 2014

On Thursday morning of the IETF 90 meeting, we had a Birds of a Feather (BoF) session called IANAPLAN: Planning for the IANA/NTIA Transition.

Last March, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced a plan “to transition key Internet domain name functions to the global multistakeholder community.”  The NTIA’s plan is to do this in conjunction with the expiry of its contract with ICANN in September of 2015.

NTIA asked the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to convene various stake-holders, including the IETF, to develop a proposal for how to complete the transition.  ICANN did that, and various organizations appointed members of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG).  The IAB appointed two (Russ Housley and Lynn St. Amour), and the IETF appointed two (Jari Arkko and Alissa Cooper).

Given those activities going on outside the IETF, the IESG concluded that it needed to know what the IETF community thinks.  The IAB has a program for IANA evolution, but the IAB isn’t tasked with representing IETF consensus.  The goal of the BoF was to understand whether an IETF working group is needed to respond to the NTIA’s request and to work on the overall questions related to the IANA transition.  To me, at least, the BoF was successful in learning what we needed to know.

There were three clear messages from the BoF.  The first, clarion message was that we have an existing, working, well-functioning system, and we should take extreme care to avoid changing it, while documenting how it satisfies requirements from the NTIA. It appears that this was a value already shared, but it was good to have it confirmed.

The second message was that, because there are changes to the overarching framework in which our existing system fits, we need to understand how those changes might affect us by accident.  We need to have a complete analysis of that, and ensure that anything that could affect us is addressed.  That way, we can avoid unwanted changes to our smoothly-functioning existing system.

The final message was that, given the very short time we have, it would be best if the IAB’s IANA evolution program undertook most of the work.  At the same time, we need a newly-created working group to review that work and achieve (and demonstrate) consensus.

What is particularly heartening about this is that the apparent strong consensus in the BoF is itself a clear example of the existing IETF procedures working.  There is a question — in this case, a policy question, and not a protocol one — that needs a decision, and the community comes together and makes a decision based on both rough consensus (the agreement displayed in the room) and running code (the actually functioning procedures we have today). This gives us the opportunity both to state how we wish to proceed, and show how well that works in practice.


Share this page