A grace note on John's reply:
It is *precisely* because of the complexity of the organizational relationships
that we now have a contract and an MoU defining our relations with the
RFC Editor and the IANA respectively. As long as the contract and the MoU
are respected, it is no concern of ours how the staff concerned divide
their time.
Brian
John C Klensin - IAB Chair wrote:
>
> --On Friday, April 14, 2000 14:41 +0200 "Shaw, Robert"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > O.K., help me understand this. ISOC paid ISI a few hundred
> > thousand dollars (?) for the RFC-Editor functions (wasn't it
> > really funding for the entire IANA role?).
>
> No. It is important to understand that the IANA role and the
> RFC Editor one were _always_ separate, although some of the same
> people were historically involved in both and, again
> historically, both operated under Jon Postel's management.
>
> > However, since
> > Joyce Reynolds is now listed both as a staff member of ICANN
> > ("Manager of Publications") at
> > http://www.icann.org/general/abouticann.htm and "liaison" to
> > the RFC editor on the IAB pages at
> > http://www.iab.org/members.html the ISOC funding seems to have
> > been used/absorbed for ICANN staff?
>
> Again, no. Many of us find ourselves wearing multiple hats. I
> don't know the financial arrangements between ISI and ICANN that
> support the two arrangements for Joyce's time, but she is less
> than full time on either of them. I.e., part of her time
> involves RFC Editor work (and the related liaison to IAB),
> another involves some efforts on ICANN's part. As described in
> the most recent IAB Charter, there is also provision for a
> liaison from the IANA: while that position is now vacant, we
> assume it will soon be filled and do not expect that Joyce be
> the person filling that role.
>
> > However, since there is a recent MoU between IETF and ICANN
> > "Concerning the Technical Work of the Internet Assigned
> > Numbers Authority" at
> > http://www.icann.org/general/ietf-icann-mou-01mar00.htm, I'm
> > puzzled why the scope of this did not include the RFC-Editor
> > function? If the the absence is supposed to indicate some
> > IETF independence from ICANN, it's certainly not clear this
> > is reality if the IAB RFC-Editor liaison contact is working
> > for ICANN.
>
> If she were working full time for ICANN, and not at all for ISI,
> or if the RFC Editor function consisted of ICANN (and not ISI)
> staff, this would be an interesting observation and conclusion.
> But neither is the case.
>
> Again, the RFC Editor and IANA functions are separate and always
> have been. There are useful synergies between the two
> activites, which is why we have welcomed close coordination, but
> your confusion is due to assuming that the two are really the
> same.
>
> > The above MoU recognizes that the "IANA technical team is now
> > part of ICANN" and that the "IAB is chartered to designate
> > the IANA on behalf of the IETF". But isn't this agreement
> > only ad hoc recognition of reality since the IAB really
> > doesn't have any ability to (re)designate the IANA functions?
> > That's because there's this strong rumour going around that
> > the US Department of Commerce believes it is transferring the
> > IANA functions to ICANN....
>
> IANA has traditionally had several functions, and some of the
> boundaries periodically create confusion. We are satisfied with
> the present relationships and hence see no prospect for having
> to change then. However, we believe that there is a fairly
> general understanding among IAB, ICANN, and US DoC that the IAB
> could, indeed, transfer the portions of the IANA efforts that
> relate to IETF work elsewhere if that were necessary or
> desirable.
>
> John Klensin
> IAB Chair
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter
Program Director, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM
On assignment for IBM at http://www.iCAIR.org
Attend INET 2000: http://www.isoc.org/inet2000
Non-IBM email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
