--On Friday, April 14, 2000 14:41 +0200 "Shaw, Robert"
<Robert(_dot_)Shaw(_at_)itu(_dot_)int> 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