ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: business deals and BCP for IAOC / IAD

2005-01-26 09:26:28
Maybe I am naive, but the discussion I have seen on the list is not actually about something the IETF can or should "approve". Reportedly, ForeTec, CNRI, and Neustar are in negotiations. The IETF has no say in such negotiations.

Reportedly, what has been asked is "will the IETF react badly to Neustar engage in this transaction?" My reaction to the question is:
1) It shows good sense that Neustar is asking
2) As has been noted (and probably was understood when the question was asked) no one is in a position to answer this definitively, nor to bind the community to an answer.
3) Based on what was posted, it seems unlikely to upset the applecart.

Now, there are lots of "interesting" issues in such a deal, including issues about who owns what intellectual property now, who will own it aftwards, who will own what going forward, etc. However, that is mostly a matter of Neustar and CNRI having discussions, with property disclosures about risks and proper skepticism as is suited to any business deal. It does not involve the IETF, IESG, IAB, IAOC, interim IACO, IAD, ISOC, or any other part of I* making assertions or conclusions.

It also, at least according to what I saw on this list, dos not involve the IAOC making any kind of binding committment to work with Neustar now or in the future.

Pragmatically, if such a deal does take place, then we will be working with Neustar whether we want to or not. The fact that they appear to be sensitive to concerns is nice, but irrelevant.

I appreciate the interim IAOC letting us know that hey have been informed of such discusions, and asked certain questions. There is no indication that they have over-reached themselves in responding. There is no indication that anything in the BCP needs to be reconsidered or changed based on this.

So can we worry about the things we need to focus on for getting the BCP done? Can we find some meeting point on the open issues (particularly review / appeal) so we can get this done? [Oh heck. I have written this much, I might as well state my opinion on this issue.] There are clearly risks with either a process that invites second guessing and business interference, or with a process that hides everything from the community. At a guess, whatever we write for this will be slightly wrong. If it turns out to be seriously wrong, we will fix it. I personally tend towards language that restricts the appeals / reviews because I would rather see a lityle too much accomplished without enough notice / oversight rather than see things blocked if one or the other error case comes to pass. We have to pick our risks.

Yours,
Joel

At 10:13 AM 1/26/2005, John C Klensin wrote:
discussion of business deal elided.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>