< draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-08.txt   draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-09.txt >
IANAPLAN E. Lear, Ed. IANAPLAN E. Lear, Ed.
Internet-Draft Internet-Draft
Intended status: Informational R. Housley, Ed. Intended status: Informational R. Housley, Ed.
Expires: June 25, 2015 Expires: July 10, 2015
December 22, 2014 January 6, 2015
Draft Response to the Internet Coordination Group Request for Proposals Draft Response to the Internet Coordination Group Request for Proposals
on the IANA protocol parameters registries on the IANA protocol parameters registries
draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-08 draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-09
Abstract Abstract
The U.S. NTIA has solicited a request from ICANN to propose how the The U.S. NTIA has solicited a request from ICANN to propose how the
NTIA should end its oversight of the IANA functions. After broad NTIA should end its oversight of the IANA functions. After broad
consultations, ICANN has in turn created the IANA Stewardship consultations, ICANN has in turn created the IANA Stewardship
Transition Coordination Group. That group solicited proposals for Transition Coordination Group. That group solicited proposals for
thre three major IANA functions: names, numbers, and protocol thre three major IANA functions: names, numbers, and protocol
parameters. This document contains the IETF response to that parameters. This document contains the IETF response to that
solicitation for protocol parameters. It is meant to be included in solicitation for protocol parameters. It is meant to be included in
skipping to change at page 1, line 41 skipping to change at page 1, line 41
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 25, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 10, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 2, line 24 skipping to change at page 2, line 24
1. IETF Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. IETF Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. The Formal RFP Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. The Formal RFP Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5. IAB Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5. IAB Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Appendix A. Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Appendix A. Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A.1. Changes from -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A.1. Changes from -08 to -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A.2. Changes from -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.2. Changes from -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A.3. Changes from -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.3. Changes from -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.4. Changes from -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.4. Changes from -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.5. Changes from -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.5. Changes from -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.6. Changes from -02 to -03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.6. Changes from -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.7. Changes from -01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.7. Changes from -02 to -03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.8. Changes from -00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.8. Changes from -01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.9. Changes from -00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Appendix B. The Charter of the IANA Stewardship Coordination Appendix B. The Charter of the IANA Stewardship Coordination
Group (ICG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Group (ICG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Appendix C. IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group Appendix C. IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
Request for Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Request for Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Appendix D. Completed ICG response for the NTIA . . . . . . . . 33 Appendix D. Completed ICG response for the NTIA . . . . . . . . 33
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
1. IETF Introduction 1. IETF Introduction
In March of 2014 the U.S. National Telecommunications & Information In March of 2014 the U.S. National Telecommunications & Information
skipping to change at page 12, line 41 skipping to change at page 12, line 41
current IANA functions contract between ICANN and the NTIA current IANA functions contract between ICANN and the NTIA
[NTIA-Contract] to achieve a smooth transition to subsequent [NTIA-Contract] to achieve a smooth transition to subsequent
operator(s), should the need arise. Furthermore, in the event of operator(s), should the need arise. Furthermore, in the event of
a transition it is the expectation of the IETF community that a transition it is the expectation of the IETF community that
ICANN, the IETF, and subsequent operator(s) will work together to ICANN, the IETF, and subsequent operator(s) will work together to
minimize disruption in the use the protocol parameters registries minimize disruption in the use the protocol parameters registries
or other resources currently located at iana.org. or other resources currently located at iana.org.
In developing our response we have been mindful of the following In developing our response we have been mindful of the following
points that the IETF community has discussed over the last year points that the IETF community has discussed over the last year
[ProtoParamEvo14]. Discussions during the IETF 89 meeting in London [ProtoParamEvo14] that have led to the following guiding principles
led to the following guiding principles for IAB efforts that impact for IAB efforts that impact IANA protocol parameter registries.
IANA protocol parameter registries. These principles must be taken These principles must be taken together; their order is not
together; their order is not significant. significant.
1. The IETF protocol parameters registries function has been and 1. The IETF protocol parameters registries function has been and
continues to be capably provided by the Internet technical community. continues to be capably provided by the Internet technical community.
The strength and stability of the function and its foundation within The strength and stability of the function and its foundation within
the Internet technical community are both important given how the Internet technical community are both important given how
critical protocol parameters are to the proper functioning of IETF critical protocol parameters are to the proper functioning of IETF
protocols. protocols.
We think the structures that sustain the protocol parameters We think the structures that sustain the protocol parameters
skipping to change at page 18, line 36 skipping to change at page 18, line 36
>>> >>>
>>> An assessment of the level of consensus behind your community's >>> An assessment of the level of consensus behind your community's
>>> proposal, including a description of areas of contention or >>> proposal, including a description of areas of contention or
>>> disagreement. >>> disagreement.
>>> >>>
IETF Response: IETF Response:
This document has attained rough consensus of the IETF Working Group This document has attained rough consensus of the IETF Working Group
and of the IETF community as a whole, as judged first by the chairs and of the IETF community as a whole, as judged first by the working
and then by the sponsoring Area Director, and then by the IESG in group chairs and then by the sponsoring Area Director, and then by
accordance with [RFC2026] during the 18 December 2014 IESG telechat. the IESG in accordance with [RFC2026] during the 18 December 2014
The IESG has approved the draft, pending insertion of this answer in IESG telechat. The IESG has approved the draft, pending insertion of
this section and the IAB approval note. The IAB approved a statement this answer in this section and the IAB approval note. The IAB
for inclusion in the document on 19 December 2014. approved a statement for inclusion in the document on 19 December
2014.
Over the course of the development of the document, several Over the course of the development of the document, several
suggestions were raised that did not enjoy sufficient support to be suggestions were raised that did not enjoy sufficient support to be
included. Two general areas of suggestion that generated much included. Two general areas of suggestion that generated much
discussion were discussion were
o A suggestion for a stronger statement over what terms the IAOC o A suggestion for a stronger statement over what terms the IAOC
should negotiate. should negotiate.
o A suggestion that "iana.org" and other associated marks be o A suggestion that "iana.org" and other associated marks be
skipping to change at page 19, line 22 skipping to change at page 19, line 25
shepherdwriteup/ shepherdwriteup/
During IETF last call, additional people voiced support for the During IETF last call, additional people voiced support for the
document. There were several editorial comments that resulted in document. There were several editorial comments that resulted in
changes, as well as some discussion of more substantial comments some changes, as well as some discussion of more substantial comments some
of which resulted in text changes. There was some discussion of of which resulted in text changes. There was some discussion of
comments already discussed earlier in the process, and but no new comments already discussed earlier in the process, and but no new
objections were raised during the IETF last call. A summary of the objections were raised during the IETF last call. A summary of the
last call comments can be found from here: last call comments can be found from here:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01477.html http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01500.html
New draft versions were prepared that took into account all the New draft versions were prepared that took into account all the
agreed changes from the last call. The final version was then agreed changes from the last call. The final version was then
approved by the IESG. approved by the IESG.
3. IANA Considerations 3. IANA Considerations
This memo is a response to a request for proposals. No parameter This memo is a response to a request for proposals. No parameter
allocations or changes are sought. allocations or changes are sought.
skipping to change at page 22, line 41 skipping to change at page 22, line 41
[RFC7020] Housley, R., Curran, J., Huston, G., and D. Conrad, "The [RFC7020] Housley, R., Curran, J., Huston, G., and D. Conrad, "The
Internet Numbers Registry System", RFC 7020, August 2013. Internet Numbers Registry System", RFC 7020, August 2013.
[RFC7249] Housley, R., "Internet Numbers Registries", RFC 7249, May [RFC7249] Housley, R., "Internet Numbers Registries", RFC 7249, May
2014. 2014.
Appendix A. Changes Appendix A. Changes
NOTE: This section to be removed by RFC Editor at publication. NOTE: This section to be removed by RFC Editor at publication.
A.1. Changes from -07 to -08 A.1. Changes from -08 to -09
o Update URL for summary of the IETF Last Call.
o Two minor editorial improvements.
A.2. Changes from -07 to -08
o Update text describing the consensus process. o Update text describing the consensus process.
o Insert IAB approval text. o Insert IAB approval text.
o Point to the proceedings of IETF 91 for IANAPLAN WG agenda and o Point to the proceedings of IETF 91 for IANAPLAN WG agenda and
minutes. minutes.
A.2. Changes from -06 to -07 A.3. Changes from -06 to -07
o Merge "No new changes are needed" with "No new organizations or o Merge "No new changes are needed" with "No new organizations or
structures are required". Fewer words to say the same thing. structures are required". Fewer words to say the same thing.
o consult to consult and coordinate. o consult to consult and coordinate.
o RFC Editor comments. o RFC Editor comments.
o Edits resulting from Security Area review by Sean Turner. o Edits resulting from Security Area review by Sean Turner.
o Edits resulting from AD comments. o Edits resulting from AD comments.
A.3. Changes from -05 to -06 A.4. Changes from -05 to -06
o Inclusion of agreed substantial comments from the AD. o Inclusion of agreed substantial comments from the AD.
o Editorial changes. o Editorial changes.
A.4. Changes from -04 to -05 A.5. Changes from -04 to -05
o Change to simpler text for answer about stability and security. o Change to simpler text for answer about stability and security.
o Mention of RFC 5226bis. o Mention of RFC 5226bis.
A.5. Changes from -03 to -04 A.6. Changes from -03 to -04
o Additional text regarding what is needed in Section III. o Additional text regarding what is needed in Section III.
o Appropriate language modifications in section IV to match the o Appropriate language modifications in section IV to match the
above changes in III. above changes in III.
o Acknowledgments edits. o Acknowledgments edits.
A.6. Changes from -02 to -03 A.7. Changes from -02 to -03
o Terminology consistency. o Terminology consistency.
o Add IAB section. o Add IAB section.
o Changes based on WG discussion on what we prefer as part of the o Changes based on WG discussion on what we prefer as part of the
transition regarding IPR. transition regarding IPR.
o Add discussion about .ARPA domain. o Add discussion about .ARPA domain.
skipping to change at page 24, line 13 skipping to change at page 24, line 17
o Additional text around coordination with ICANN. o Additional text around coordination with ICANN.
o Working groups can adopt items within their charters. o Working groups can adopt items within their charters.
o IAB appointments generally last two years. o IAB appointments generally last two years.
o Add mention of the Trust. o Add mention of the Trust.
o Security Considerations update. o Security Considerations update.
A.7. Changes from -01 to -02 A.8. Changes from -01 to -02
o A better description special registries and BGP ASNs. o A better description special registries and BGP ASNs.
o Clarity on how the address space and ASNs are delegated. o Clarity on how the address space and ASNs are delegated.
o Many editorials corrected. o Many editorials corrected.
o Mention of the annual review as part of the SLAs. o Mention of the annual review as part of the SLAs.
o Change about how overlap is presented. o Change about how overlap is presented.
o A number of small wording changes based on feedback. o A number of small wording changes based on feedback.
A.8. Changes from -00 to -01 A.9. Changes from -00 to -01
o Front matter greatly reduced. o Front matter greatly reduced.
o Appendices with charter and RFP added. o Appendices with charter and RFP added.
o Jurisdiction text changed. o Jurisdiction text changed.
o Proposed changes include supplemental agreement(s) to address o Proposed changes include supplemental agreement(s) to address
jurisdiction, dispute resolution, and IPR, including names and jurisdiction, dispute resolution, and IPR, including names and
marks. marks.
 End of changes. 16 change blocks. 
32 lines changed or deleted 40 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/