ianaplanwg-v00.txt   ianaplanwg-v06.txt 
Area: General Area: General
Responsible AD: Jari Arkko Responsible AD: Jari Arkko
Chairs: TBD Chairs: TBD
Background Background
========== ==========
The IETF stores parameters for protocols it defines in registries. Registries of parameter values for use in IETF protocols are stored
These registries are maintained by the Internet Assigned Numbers and maintainted for the IETF by the Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority (IANA), and are the subject of the "IANA Considerations" Authority (IANA), and are the subject of the "IANA Considerations"
section in many RFCs. section in many RFCs.
For a number of years, the IANA function has been provided by the For a number of years, maintenance of the IETF protocol parameters
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). The registries has been provided by the Internet Corporation for Assigned
IETF's relationship with IANA was formalized through a Memorandum of Names and Numbers (ICANN). The IETF's relationship with IANA was
Understanding codified in 2000 with the publication of RFC 2860; over formalized through a Memorandum of Understanding between the IETF and
time processes and role definitions have evolved, and have been ICANN codified in 2000 with the publication of RFC 2860. Over time,
documented in supplemental agreements. processes and role definitions have evolved, and have been documented
in supplemental agreements.
ICANN has historically had a contract with the US Department of ICANN has had a contract with the US Department of Commerce (DoC) to
Commerce (DoC), undertaken through the National Telecommunications and provide the IANA function, undertaken through the National
Information Administration (NTIA). In March of 2014, NTIA announced Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). In March of
its intention to complete the evolution begun in 1997, meaning that 2014, NTIA announced its intention to transition out of its current
NTIA would not need to renew its contract with ICANN when that role, meaning that NTIA would not need to renew its contract with
contract expires 30 September 2015. NTIA requested a transition ICANN when that contract expires 30 September 2015. NTIA requested a
proposal be prepared to outline the necessary arrangements. In the transition proposal be prepared to outline the necessary
case of the IETF, we expect these arrangements to consist largely of arrangements. In the case of the elements of the IANA function
the existing well-documented practices. concerning the IETF protocol registries, it is likely that the
existing well-documented practices will continue and no or little new
activity will be required.
Tasks Tasks
===== =====
The WG will review, comment on, evaluate, and if need be prepare text The IANAPLAN working group is chartered to produce an IETF consensus
for a proposal about protocol parameters registries. It will assume document that describes the expected interaction between the IETF and
the following documents continue to be in effect: the operator of IETF protocol parameters registries.
- RFC 2850 (especially section 2(d)) The system in place today for oversight of the IETF protocol
registries component of the IANA function works well. As a result,
minimal change in the oversight of the IETF protocol parameters
registries is preferred in all cases and no change is preferred when
possible. The working group will address the implications of moving
the NTIA out of its current role with respect to IANA on the IETF
protocol parameters registry function in a way that focuses on
continuation of the current arrangements. The working group will
assume the following documents continue to be in effect:
- RFC 2850
- RFC 3777 and its updates
- RFC 2860 - RFC 2860
- RFC 6220 - RFC 6220
- IETF-ICANN-MOU_2000 - IETF-ICANN-MOU_2000
(http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/IETF-ICANN-MOU_2000.pdf) (http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/IETF-ICANN-MOU_2000.pdf)
- ICANN-IETF Supplemental Agreements - ICANN-IETF Supplemental Agreements
(updated yearly since 2007, the 2014 version is available at (updated yearly since 2007, the 2014 version is available at
http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/2014-ICANN-IETF-MoU-Supplemental-Agreement-Executed.pdf) http://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/
2014-ICANN-IETF-MoU-Supplemental-Agreement-Executed.pdf)
It is possible that RFC 3777 and its updates are also implicated.
This work is chartered exclusively to create the proposal that is This working group is chartered solely with respect to the planning
needed for the transition. Possible improvements outside that scope needed for the transition, and is not meant to cover other topics
will be set aside for future consideration. Avoiding alterations in related to IANA. Possible improvements outside that scope will be set
outcomes should be pursued, even if the eventual structure (without aside for future consideration. However, the mechanisms required to
the overarching NTIA contract) requires procedural changes in order to address the removal of the overarching NTIA contract may require
address the new structure. additional documentation or agreements.
The WG will also review, comment on, and evaluate proposals from other Should proposals made by other communities regarding the
communities about the NTIA transition, to the extent that those transition of other IANA functions affect the IETF protocol parameter
proposals impinge on the protocol parameters registries or the IETF. registries or the IETF, the WG may also review and comment on them.
The results of any WG consensus on protocol parameters registries Some parts of the transition proposal may need to document detailed
will, of necessity, be input but not necessarily firm restrictions on terms of agreements or other details of procedures that are normally
any contractual terms that are ultimately adopted by the IAB and any delegated to and handled by the IAB or IAOC. The working group will
future IANA functions provider, or contractual terms ultimately not attempt to produce or discuss documentation for these details, but
adopted by the IAOC and any future IANA functions provider. will request the IAB or IAOC to provide them ready for submission as
Statements of principle and desired outcomes are more important items part of the final proposal.
to be delivered by the working group than are detailed terms for
future agreements.
It is expected that much of the work of the WG will lie in reviewing The WG shall seek the expertise of the IAB IANA Strategy Program to
materials produced by the IAB in its role as the interface to other formulate its output. It is expected that members of the IAB IANA
organizations. Strategy Program will actively participate in the WG.
Milestones Milestones
========== ==========
January 2015 -- complete protocol parameters registries proposal January 2015 -- complete protocol parameters registries proposal
May 2015 -- review of other transition proposals, if needed May 2015 -- review of other transition proposals, if needed
Sept 2015 -- close Sept 2015 -- close
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
44 lines changed or deleted 55 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/