Re: ICANN will "coordination of the assignment" of protocol parameters (Forwarded)

[John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>]

This is part of what I have muttered to some of you about in the
last few days (just muttering, nothing specific).  

My impression of the (relatively) inside story is that DoC and
ICANN were under their own set of constraints on this one,
including a desire to have a strong (and long) enough agreement
to keep the much crazier and more nationalistic parts of the US
Govt out of ICANN, the DNS, and our hair.

The advice I got when I whined within the Board about this was
that it was probably best to accept the language as politics
among other constituencies and to pay more attention to what
they actually do and how they work with us.

I am not completely happy with that, but it is probably sound
advice.

     john


--On Wednesday, September 17, 2003 15:24 -0400 Steve Bellovin
<smb@research.att.com> wrote:

> ------- Forwarded Message
> From: Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>
> Message-Id: <200309171905.h8HJ5M3g008153@newdev.harvard.edu>
> To: iab@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org
> Subject: ICANN will "coordination of the assignment" of
> protocol parameters Sender: iesg-admin@ietf.org

> see http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-17sep03.htm
> and
> 4th WHEREAS bullet d
> in
> http://www.icann.org/general/amend6-jpamou-17sep03.htm
> 
> Scott