[Internal-cg] how collaboration works today between the OCs

[joseph alhadeff]

good example of needs-generated dynamic cooperative process...

On 10/3/2015 7:00 AM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> The explicit examples that exists are very few. My favourite example involves the IP addresses.
>
> IETF set the over all policy for IP addresses. Some blocks are to be used for routing on the Internet. IANA keep track of this over arching allocation. RIRs then sets the detailed policy for those subsets of the addresses. When RIRs later request addresses from IANA,  IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA zones (and whois) are updated accordingly, i.e. managed by IANA, although ARPA TLD is managed by IAB.
>
> So, IETF set the over arching policy, RIRs set the detailed policy. IANA is coordinating and keeps track of all of this.
>
>     Patrik
>
> On 3 Oct 2015, at 12:36, joseph alhadeff wrote:
>
>> Patrik:
>>
>> I don't think there's a real issue with keeping the OC descriptions/historical function as long as we provide the needed examples of cooperation and consultation across different scenarios.  The mere statement that the concept of cooperation exists is not sufficient to make the needed point that collaboration and cooperation are context specific/as needed or provide the kind of assurance that will address the misplaced desire to develop or impose a specific mechanism for collaboration and cooperation.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> On 10/3/2015 2:57 AM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>>> On 3 Oct 2015, at 1:42, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>>> The fact that the bodies that establish registry policies can also choose which operator will run the registry is interesting, but it’s a bit of a subtle point and I think it may be complicated to explain without adding a lot of additional clarifying value.
>>> Hmm...let me just ensure my point is made clear here.
>>>
>>> As each registry is decided upon by the OC defining it, and not the OCs as a collective, collaboration is explicitly needed. They must explicitly reach out to the other OCs and collaborate with them.
>>>
>>> That was my point.
>>>
>>> Patrik
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Internal-cg mailing list
>>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org