Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050316144451.044824d0@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:19:22 +0100
To: nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de, ltru@ietf.org
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: "Obsolete" region subtags
In-Reply-To: <42382C1F.762A@freenet.de>
References: <20050314001938.PAYD5424.mta6.adelphia.net@megatron.ietf.org>
	<002701c52833$a99cdd00$030aa8c0@DEWELL>
	<6.1.2.0.2.20050314024326.03f4fd20@mail.jefsey.com>
	<006201c52843$6b79ee40$030aa8c0@DEWELL>
	<6.1.2.0.2.20050314120015.03fe3cf0@mail.jefsey.com>
	<42364EDB.197@xyzzy.claranet.de>
	<6.1.2.0.2.20050315102933.03405df0@mail.jefsey.com>
	<42382C1F.762A@freenet.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: 
Precedence: list
Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Dear Frank,
I understand and respect your political positions.
What I do not understand then is why do you want to use the IANA?
As you may know, the IANA is an US Governement set of functions contracted 
to ICANN.
http://www.icann.org/general/iana-contract-09feb00.htm
http://www.icann.org/general/iana-contract-21mar01.htm
http://www.icann.org/general/iana-contract-17mar03.htm


At 13:52 16/03/2005, Frank Ellermann wrote:
>I'm strongly opposed to this position.  Governments are among
>the last entities I'd trust, and only after a random generator
>failed.

More generaly you may want to consult:
http://www.icann.org/general/agreements.htm
to understand in which environment the IANA functions.

The MoU with IETF stipulates that:
"4.3. Two particular assigned spaces present policy issues in addition to 
the technical considerations specified by the IETF: the assignment of 
domain names, and the assignment of IP address blocks. These policy issues 
are outside the scope of this MOU.

Note that (a) assignments of domain names for technical uses (such as 
domain names for inverse DNS lookup), (b) assignments of specialised 
address blocks (such as multicast or anycast blocks), and (c) experimental 
assignments are not considered to be policy issues, and shall remain 
subject to the provisions of this Section 4. (For purposes of this MOU, the 
term "assignments" includes allocations.) In the event ICANN adopts a 
policy that prevents it from complying with the provisions of this Section 
4 with respect to the assignments described in (a) - (c) above, ICANN will 
notify the IETF, which may then exercise its ability to cancel this MOU 
under Section 2 above.
"
What is discussed here is "in the event ICANN adopts a policy ....". I 
submit that what is relevant to IDNs does not fall under the terms of this 
agreement. I submit that what is true for ICANN adopting a policy .... is 
also true in the case IETF introduces discrepancies with ICANN policies 
(your abrupt wording concerning some of the ccTLDs is an obvious 
discrepancy). I submit that this wording can only confort the USG, ICANN, 
the GAC, UNESCO, ITU to consider that the name IANA area extends to 
language issues. A position I certainly support, extending it to Civil 
Society co-control.

This is why I suggest that instead in saying "I do what I want", we try to 
coordinate, look for syngergy in the others' need we could address at the 
same time, to obtain a better entertwinned and therefore mutually protected 
situation.

jfc



Hosting a registry will cost you probably $ 250, all included.
And as a premium, I would support anything you may want to do.

=====================================================
For your convenience:
Draft: 		http://www.inter-locale.com/ID/draft-ietf-ltru-registry-00.txt
Charter: 	http://ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
gmane: 	http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.ltru
If you were Bcced for information and not familliar with the IETF process:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2026.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2418.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3934.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3669.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3160.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffman-taobis-02.txt
=====================================================
Jon Postel (RFC 1591): "The IANA is not in the business of deciding
what is and what is not a country. The selection of the ISO 3166 list
  as a basis for country code top-level domain names was made with
  the knowledge that ISO has a procedure for determining which
entities should be and should not be on that list."
=====================================================
Brian Carpenter (RFC 1958/3.2): "If there are several ways of doing the
same thing, choose one. If a previous design, in the Internet context
or elsewhere, has successfully solved the same problem, choose the
same solution unless there is a good technical reason not to.
Duplication of the same protocol functionality should be avoided as far as
possible, without of course using this argument to reject improvements."
=====================================================
It seems that what works for countries and ISO 3166 since 1978 should
apply to languages and to ISO 693.
=====================================================


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru