[discuss] IANA

Phillip Hallam-Baker hallam at gmail.com
Mon Jan 6 15:35:42 UTC 2014

As a practical matter, it would probably be a good idea to rename and
rebrand the protocol registry so that it does not get caught in the
crossfire as the IP allocation function is disputed.

Allocating shared code points in a shared conceptual namespace is very
different in practice and principle to allocation of code points which by
their function are for use of specific parties. Allocating IP and DNS
addresses is completely different to maintaining the list of parameters for

Separating the protocol registry from the IP registry also helps build a
firewall to protect IETF. The protocol registry is really an extension of
the IETF functions, just like the RFC editor.

The reason the IETF is targeted for ITU takeover but OASIS, W3C etc. do not
is that it is seen as co-extensive with the Internet control points despite
the fact that IETF actually has no remaining influence there.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140106/5fbd9555/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list