[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Thanks for the clarification. It's clearly time to give up on IANA if
it's merely part of the ICANN catastrophe. That doesn't mean giving up
on registration more generally, however - it means giving up on
registration until such time as an accountable registrar comes into
existence. Perhaps ICANN's sheer corruption will lead to such a thing
eventually.
jcowan@reutershealth.com (John Cowan) writes:
>Simon St.Laurent scripsit:
>
>> It's not clear that the "IANA function" in general has been
>> contracted to ICANN - the message appears to be only about country
>> codes. I'd certainly like clarification on the status of the IANA
>> generally, though.
>
>Thus spake RFC 3160, the Tao of the IETF (2001 but still current):
>
># The core registrar for the IETF's activities is the IANA. Many
># Internet protocols require that someone keep track of protocol
items
># that were added after the protocol came out. Typical examples of
>the
># kinds of registries needed are for TCP port numbers and MIME types.
># The IAB has designated the IANA organization to perform these
tasks,
># and the IANA's activities are financially supported by ICANN, the
># Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.
>
>Who pays the piper calls the tune, and the Commerce Department is
>simply reaffirming the status quo.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
