<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
Hi,<br>
<br>
i understand it might happen and I am not looking to lock IANA
fragmentation out, though personally I would prefer it not happen.
Just looking for a solution that does not lead to it. I understand,
for example, that the IETF can decide to, but does not need to.
Some of the solutions seem to push on the boundary making IANA
fragmentation (I see IANA as the true root of the Internet where it
all comes together) seem natural and more likely to happen. I
would prefer to see that as a process fault that needs to be dealt
if and when it happens as opposed to a natural conclusion of the
process.<br>
<br>
I also understand there are different views on how dangerous this
split might be. We are all speculating. But when I look at the
interactions among the various IANA directories, occasional as they
might be, I think it is an expereiment we just dont need.<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16-Nov-14 07:14, Milton L Mueller
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:89360e14b6734fbdaccbccd2aaa490da@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Avri
I agree with many of your sentiments but I think it's a big mistake to tie the trust concept to locking all the IANA functions into a single operator. For one thing, many of us are not convinced that the functions cannot and should not be separated. I went into this process believing that it was complicated to separate them but the more I've learned about what actually goes on the more separable the three basic functions seem to be. (Not to mention that some of the things the IANA now does, such as operate the .int registry, it probably should not be doing at all).
But even if you don't agree with that, a trust might provide the additional layer that makes it easier, rather than harder, to delegate the protocol, names and numbers functions to different entities while ensuring that they are coordinated under an integrated aegis. And that in fact may turn out to be one of the strongest arguments for your trust approach. So when you say:
- a soltion that does not lead us in the slicing IANA into many little ianas. (It is ironic that the IANA stewardship transition process may result in the yet another form of Internet fragmentation)
...you may be underselling your idea.
Milton L Mueller
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/">http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/</a>
Internet Governance Project
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://internetgovernance.org">http://internetgovernance.org</a><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://internetgovernance.org/"><http://internetgovernance.org/></a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>