From nobody Tue May 2 09:18:41 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccg@ietf.org Delivered-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42839129BBB; Tue, 2 May 2017 06:43:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: The IETF Trust To: "IETF Announcement List" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.50.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: trustees@ietf.org Message-ID: <149373262717.9880.7516296670939349912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 06:43:47 -0700 Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 02 May 2017 09:18:40 -0700 Subject: [CCG] Proposed Changes to License Agreements between ICANN and IETF Trust X-BeenThere: ccg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: IANA IPR Community Coordination Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 13:43:47 -0000 All; We are in the process of transferring the IANA domains to the Trust from ICANN using CSC as the registrar. The agreement with CSC requires the incorporation of the IANA IPR License Agreements’ Exhibit E Domain Name Registrar Requirements. Exhibit E is the same in each of the three IANA IPR License Agreements between the Trust and ICANN, specifically the licenses for the IANA Names Services, the IANA Numbers Services and the IANA Protocol Parameter Services. The implementation of the domain name registrar requirements needed additional details than in the current Exhibit E. These details have been worked out with ICANN, reviewed by the CCG and approved by the IETF Trust for this review by the community. Specifically the proposed changes affect the following: under the circumstance where the Administrative and Technical Contacts must approve the change to the Technical Contact the Registrar must provide notice of a receipt of a request to each to change the Technical Contact. Additionally, under the circumstance where the Registrant (Trust) can override the need for the other parties to approve a change to the Technical Contact, the Registrant must provide documentation that notice of the change was provided to both the Administrative and Technical Contacts and that no response was received after a period of no less than ten business days. These conditions are also incorporated under the circumstances where the domain is set to prohibit registrar transfers, to prohibit deletions, and to remove the configuration to renew the domain automatically. A markup of the License Agreement Exhibit E reflects those proposed details and can be found here as Proposed Amendment to License Agreements 1 May 17: https://trustee.ietf.org/iana.html CSC has agreed that it can implement the proposed changes. It is believed the next steps are: a. Community Review b. Acceptance of proposed changes to Exhibit E by the Trust c. Trust and ICANN execute amendments to the three License Agreements d. Incorporate the changes in CSC Agreement Schedule A (Schedule A is the same as Exhibit E of the License Agreements) e. Trust puts Schedule A of the CSC Agreement out for Community Review f. Community Review g. Trust executes CSC Agreement h. CSC Test of conformance to the requirements i. All IANA domains transferred upon successful test Your feedback by 17 May 2017 on the proposed amendments to Exhibit E of the IANA IPR License Agreements and the next steps are appreciated. Thanks. Kaveh Ranjbar Chair IETF Trust From nobody Tue May 2 11:47:51 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDD1412EAD6 for ; Tue, 2 May 2017 11:47:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.62 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SVGPVY6ZuZPQ for ; Tue, 2 May 2017 11:47:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from authsmtp.register.it (authsmtp10.register.it [81.88.48.60]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6ECD512EC2A for ; Tue, 2 May 2017 11:44:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.37] ([88.20.144.6]) by paganini32 with id FWkU1v01508Vkuo01WkVUo; Tue, 02 May 2017 20:44:38 +0200 X-Rid: cw@christopherwilkinson.eu@88.20.144.6 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 From: CW Mail In-Reply-To: <149373262717.9880.7516296670939349912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 20:44:27 +0200 Cc: IETF Announcement List , CCG PTI Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <149373262717.9880.7516296670939349912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Trustees X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [CCG] Proposed Changes to License Agreements between ICANN and IETF Trust X-BeenThere: ccg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IANA IPR Community Coordination Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 18:47:45 -0000 Good evening: Thankyou Kaveh Ranjbar for this information.=20 For the avoidance of doubt, may we please have confirmed that this is = about Community Review of the amendments to Exhibit E that have already = been approved by CCG? In which case, which Community entities are being consulted and by whom?=20= I understand that there are no additional or new amendments proposed in = this text. Is that correct? May I also suggest that IETF please cease to use .docx formats because = they are incompatible with Open Office .odt In this case in point, the text that is described as a 'markup' contains = no edits, redlines or other markups. (This is a longstanding feature of .docx I am not inventing anything!) Regards Christopher Wilkinson On 02 May 2017, at 15:43, The IETF Trust wrote: > All; >=20 > We are in the process of transferring the IANA domains to the Trust > from ICANN using CSC as the registrar. >=20 > The agreement with CSC requires the incorporation of the IANA IPR > License Agreements=92 Exhibit E Domain Name Registrar Requirements.=20 > Exhibit E is the same in each of the three IANA IPR License > Agreements between the Trust and ICANN, specifically the licenses > for the IANA Names Services, the IANA Numbers Services and the IANA > Protocol Parameter Services. >=20 > The implementation of the domain name registrar requirements needed > additional details than in the current Exhibit E. These details have > been worked out with ICANN, reviewed by the CCG and approved by the > IETF Trust for this review by the community. >=20 > Specifically the proposed changes affect the following: under the > circumstance where the Administrative and Technical Contacts must > approve the change to the Technical Contact the Registrar must > provide notice of a receipt of a request to each to change the > Technical Contact. >=20 > Additionally, under the circumstance where the Registrant (Trust) > can override the need for the other parties to approve a change to > the Technical Contact, the Registrant must provide documentation > that notice of the change was provided to both the Administrative > and Technical Contacts and that no response was received after a > period of no less than ten business days. >=20 > These conditions are also incorporated under the circumstances where > the domain is set to prohibit registrar transfers, to prohibit > deletions, and to remove the configuration to renew the domain > automatically. >=20 > A markup of the License Agreement Exhibit E reflects those proposed > details and can be found here as Proposed Amendment to License > Agreements 1 May 17: https://trustee.ietf.org/iana.html >=20 > CSC has agreed that it can implement the proposed changes. >=20 > It is believed the next steps are: >=20 > a. Community Review > b. Acceptance of proposed changes to Exhibit E by the Trust > c. Trust and ICANN execute amendments to the three License=20 > Agreements > d. Incorporate the changes in CSC Agreement Schedule A > (Schedule A is the same as Exhibit E of the License Agreements) > e. Trust puts Schedule A of the CSC Agreement out for Community=20 > Review=20 > f. Community Review > g. Trust executes CSC Agreement > h. CSC Test of conformance to the requirements=20 > i. All IANA domains transferred upon successful test >=20 > Your feedback by 17 May 2017 on the proposed amendments to Exhibit E > of the IANA IPR License Agreements and the next steps are > appreciated. >=20 > Thanks. >=20 > Kaveh Ranjbar > Chair > IETF Trust >=20 > _______________________________________________ > CCG mailing list > CCG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccg From nobody Tue May 2 13:10:44 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A5B1293E1; Tue, 2 May 2017 13:10:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.021 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.021 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isoc.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MFwvWsuhgTKa; Tue, 2 May 2017 13:10:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAM01-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam01on0056.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.34.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30FBD128656; Tue, 2 May 2017 13:08:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.org; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=Guk9JyshbbpUeOqt1kI6odHW2USPKVIyUGqgykcmE+8=; b=d1rdN6YrR6gOXeolOJ1EjDy6kgZZG8YLfgbY5vEs4xMw7FQUP6psYs0qNqp8CLrY2H3wBIjbIcZHfzEE7GXLtDgi7QN8Q1fjg0emg3Te8taa8sNqpY7GjAWYrKpVx3HTtI/ytH7BGAnu3+MGA4txZD0nep9Gg7RxQczUxN1Dhjs= Authentication-Results: christopherwilkinson.eu; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;christopherwilkinson.eu; dmarc=none action=none header.from=isoc.org; Received: from [192.168.0.14] (104.244.129.79) by SN1PR0601MB1566.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.163.202.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1047.13; Tue, 2 May 2017 20:08:04 +0000 From: Ray Pelletier Message-ID: <99DB6EA3-B942-47E1-BB60-43326947DAE1@isoc.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_901C4EBB-2B92-49D5-8B58-7218CC39BE03" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 16:08:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: CC: Trustees Trustees , CCG PTI , IETF Announcement list To: CW Mail References: <149373262717.9880.7516296670939349912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) X-Originating-IP: [104.244.129.79] X-ClientProxiedBy: DM5PR21CA0071.namprd21.prod.outlook.com (10.175.112.161) To SN1PR0601MB1566.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.163.202.16) X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 030e5bce-ae77-447e-8895-08d49196f1e5 X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(201703131423075)(201703031133081); SRVR:SN1PR0601MB1566; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0601MB1566; 3:O4buUb9RPUfwEUYiIDkm+RBBR/14c/fRWGWKO9ZTtcLG52DRpSDhhGLHM/k0YU0Mwj7o+jpJYBtM6uwBNF3vk8rTgdG5SX3gGLiswnqIft0UrUfu6Wdph3GJ3A4U8vZTMBsi3wrPSo9uCShNPiPSW9WvZmqVZHZrA01cNfky9KZR8N2qZiy+R61InGRAfbBlQ9Iyq9ggv4YkUYlpi6z7e7v2FWBNCRAUvkPs2ULy8iqQYhtR0YunuDpGt7TT/Rw4y81+QTmClQsGV6bsLgP77Kmfl3CXG7RuyB3O8Ou5gpQY/DZKec4JZOJyrd1ZnpoRazEDb20JudDjNJ3q2wdccQ==; 25:zPj7xXZrB8ldJ39NJ8AEfh4lc7kNn61yjlc2eN0OnscV0qENiwO66acpzIH4dvJ7cHxGJ5Zy+pw3yDg2nEOuYh0QEZsXYjBNW6hv8lSd7TAOqT82qE+5DQcky8jbIIMNAPv4X5ijw0+t2QBRTVHqR9tWr342PJKdbAbx7Ar4ZubsqPXT7FBi8FBNG//8dJI0a5Faew75TKsNJc+y8aQJNvJ68dbHWCOvGGsssvgAsdCrYZvf9NTWDSgWk0k2dQM7zhwJKgVIfVFifv0gECYYT1EAzu13FX6TQ1nVxXgg8YWpv4Tv63IoWyejNLFZRDlnzVqWIu2Vj7sNkDSB6kRHXfct2IhNtsDbXStrMn/hriVbwovR3kAxtx/NhOWYbg30Q8H/WVy6RqWQ+0IG3qQfdyyxVD65IfL6QWifE2QbZ7nYuTgiIwiuvyX4ErIeRhSoEu9JfQyA/PxfEtqQLYA21A== X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0601MB1566; 31:fkj5sq4mFOFJ6DciZpoi1twN7u8pP3Om9dlA1GOwzqSuDQxhPxIsAtkyipeQMau0RWI/D9AQJn+ACfM3aRPW6aYsY6razl3Wx8epJUVco072D+iF/YnV5Dq4B7TF9h8utvrLVLF9r8Ezw0GA1vexc+DGeq7W8BYgnN9cYQPPFvdpwYIkqz9TMeFd64NQ8sGkfK5dJlXNA5tyYWz9HYQPLjRLMBEX2HVlEUgGVeAWTw/0PDJ0B+PelCGu21P4bLaMTCbjx6mi7BgARCUH4NuyMm8KiXG3JJ7xr8X7uEDbsA0=; 20:bSKyq19h1/OMiXcf2UYRN6Ka6JsE8W94u+zh6niZn44CmI9CVhVbVYXtlQ8U9DspV6Jq6HpPfX86+9HUX19z/7iGTLSJvXNFdHe7c1b27eoVWEhdMK9YzjAkCfOS8Qr+x6zlO3qOTSCpfQNbN0SM7HXJdGV5A+bd5C+hqnW7b0z6ChsxXBCJRSlx4BBDdDDs1CixffLuGamigMRxwif+Q4sJQoZGplAB1aDgbNnDw4a8OX/CrMB5MCZSuSBCeooQT1Lno8OEVe47b8eMhnA6LTtkY0uniCJVyfLsOZ/TEXByvFGSzK8P0pZCHYndMq8PRujaWoDZt9oghZlY/LRYaiLrAbFTaxlHRyo1vTl+5+7ZwJke9GxiBzIUWrcPqh+uShT86BfP47q/cwBTE4KoG+M7ckBgLml52OLGrvzTiATxtbG3NXRDfSP19DXsfvoN5syO7Vlgsfrg3FG8dp54pcU7SiT7sdnRKAyEfk9TukJ1l2Azl6yH8CLVnYryBLi9 X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040450)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046)(93006095)(93001095)(6041248)(20161123555025)(201703131423075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(20161123564025)(20161123560025)(20161123562025)(6072148); SRVR:SN1PR0601MB1566; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN1PR0601MB1566; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0601MB1566; 4: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 X-Forefront-PRVS: 02951C14DC X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4630300001)(6049001)(39830400002)(39400400002)(39410400002)(24454002)(377454003)(189998001)(42186005)(4326008)(77096006)(36756003)(84326002)(110136004)(66066001)(90366009)(6306002)(53546009)(5660300001)(54906002)(25786009)(83716003)(86362001)(69556001)(81166006)(8676002)(236005)(117156002)(229853002)(82746002)(2950100002)(50226002)(606005)(6486002)(6916009)(38730400002)(1250700005)(53936002)(2906002)(50986999)(33656002)(6666003)(76176999)(57306001)(7736002)(6116002)(3846002)(512874002)(7906003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1PR0601MB1566; H:[192.168.0.14]; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?us-ascii?Q?1; SN1PR0601MB1566; 23:aBXPwyJSQEZZ1FiJAlrq08TiUZMgwJgkrlj5/gj?= =?us-ascii?Q?nqYc2RXwOVuXbTMJ4/gsQfk1Mta7LFiOM08kIrzGMqvSwTs1RGj3jBrtJSIt?= =?us-ascii?Q?xoz8snh5Bygq4QYIRy79MzqDon1qCkYj+Cv01tFqN0uevusRflKWNL4cXiaG?= =?us-ascii?Q?OmdjFVVFb0qZ7sJbxVy5wvY7Zh7TbhYw8f8LzKss45j0sBEJqvtzGtMnlG9q?= =?us-ascii?Q?v2Kuwc2ffA1tIH1haakALuokn76xzy9LVKMwDqswDw6zZufby6en+xPupnon?= =?us-ascii?Q?7M5YnAEjvp5lKjQYyM48qMs4sfMeDDwI/8pB3+kOImnyuc4ZzjVw8TW9WEIk?= =?us-ascii?Q?nbNOe+5QvZIWD77l2cSz+pjFu7liRyXc4B/lfmIwzkC6HdmziG9TH11wIlER?= =?us-ascii?Q?VwYtDaVsoelxOa4C4pCAJ4RYOlorBqUy4tdjVUXHYJukmWY/UclhvUYC2nll?= =?us-ascii?Q?KzViLRiBCe3lObdgd93XIgFzTdggFQRX4PIDF50aEn13wMExQf/2CHtQwzgr?= =?us-ascii?Q?gt8IyLEbGncDDJzdNB/gEO3nrZEa0pp5Fcrm5qTk7oB5wKTJ9ZxXBwAHL5WS?= =?us-ascii?Q?UOCxsiDnn+ZsvtqrUjC+A1N81vwWwCRZIRRu8wxxR6MU6jGf6JEaoM4cWBNs?= =?us-ascii?Q?4Gjm0Xy6oMuzYaZq78sql8Dhmi+aAu8wtWh9uW16pFBZwyHlNIqegLecdKbV?= =?us-ascii?Q?oCjDn3G/dtr+FZhDueSYfTNv0+rnCK3lU5lqFo7HULXdAcsK97doK106Cq5a?= =?us-ascii?Q?hD224mjFq1sAubgjVl3C8XykIOHeU1CL1fMz5ErNtCDbaXYtwb8KZdYSi9HQ?= =?us-ascii?Q?Qxo+SEs/RiFDR26GSmO4DshD5OIgWeBMVZxe8H7u0EjlwwUUDd2arwlVGHET?= =?us-ascii?Q?LgMtUfQRgC/dayEt887ZKu5tXHpxqk9D+KFusxpMb/4dFh+YkMQiQqNCb/ZR?= =?us-ascii?Q?GJ54vY62D/SUMeOuY8hwU7obgD7NSWjQ5iRifQ8KtIHxawYjjzZx2A/30e/V?= =?us-ascii?Q?4V3Ljgm6tD2q6JSevIrBkqLy4MhMin1hfICFs3H823a0+Eh6f5g8mPzCBoby?= =?us-ascii?Q?ZxOT4ybnoxxMjDoJd050dJZrzDeuZRQFgVXqjKpXqcQLNg7TrwRQeE12MXq7?= =?us-ascii?Q?0XbveE+PWAWFJE133ITpF0Qy9wrJB97DZ0Aiu6Ierz/5EPwpKQhwWdbo5BjE?= =?us-ascii?Q?fvKV9bR6pi0maFzo=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0601MB1566; 6: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; 5:zGvJaUzBwO5D1Z7Fk+xmdjaXHe/q0RCP3tivmtkQ7VFr9DF1dmN5LF+SrWeozKQLAi1mwC0rNwwqV3H28hiAmmb3oX4HH0e66ODTLQatWbBnX5dftCaYdKsfkmQwI3jSQHw5eL0/u4qdHA4dav0UvA==; 24:pZ3vkgWvaCxsnHeK/OMVpuWiSWAjj12/5J4L31C2H0WbrqKbpbjOL9xhrJXD3h14XLtPjMkldCUHdKDWoWL8raN5CzHd5ogOf6FhpMPQmP4= SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99 SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; SN1PR0601MB1566; 7:Uzy7tg8xH9TWDhDNUl8zRzWe7Mp8LT6VtD077wjkiT/u6pXe+IC+97iRjiGAHr01k5ykm/YMzAS64Bn0BJb3ppeLerfYrvCQPJvuilx6FA9M08SAqseJwqgyFYDjf//J7275QguLt52eFpcZAR9MwmAor0uOAVL+sg4MRsQeg3lzW53XYKGW3ylcJalG0o13zFzrP6BsdigN5UGtm0VSSQvqJcuj5H7SdltrgQqGG1c3uY63r+CDJv2CsSnpf/E8n9aqKcYXGJRePHuuIM9cFnbKeeEmBLJP0BSjHjD1RUP7fdJoLKlyRh6LQxAiSj6ti7dEWL+pfv+pSwW5pYNaSA== X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 May 2017 20:08:04.8270 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1PR0601MB1566 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [CCG] [Trustees] Proposed Changes to License Agreements between ICANN and IETF Trust X-BeenThere: ccg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IANA IPR Community Coordination Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 20:10:25 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_901C4EBB-2B92-49D5-8B58-7218CC39BE03 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Christopher, > On May 2, 2017, at 2:44 PM, CW Mail = wrote: >=20 > Good evening: >=20 > Thankyou Kaveh Ranjbar for this information.=20 > For the avoidance of doubt, may we please have confirmed that this is = about Community Review of the amendments to Exhibit E that have already = been approved by CCG? Yes. They have already been approved by the CCG. > In which case, which Community entities are being consulted and by = whom?=20 The Trustees have an obligation to have community review as was stated=20= as next steps in the prior communications with the CCG. > I understand that there are no additional or new amendments proposed = in this text. Is that correct? That is correct. >=20 > May I also suggest that IETF please cease to use .docx formats because = they are incompatible with Open Office .odt > In this case in point, the text that is described as a 'markup' = contains no edits, redlines or other markups. Noted that Open Office doesn=E2=80=99t see markups. Ray >=20 > (This is a longstanding feature of .docx I am not inventing anything!) >=20 > Regards >=20 > Christopher Wilkinson >=20 >=20 > On 02 May 2017, at 15:43, The IETF Trust > wrote: >=20 >> All; >>=20 >> We are in the process of transferring the IANA domains to the Trust >> from ICANN using CSC as the registrar. >>=20 >> The agreement with CSC requires the incorporation of the IANA IPR >> License Agreements=E2=80=99 Exhibit E Domain Name Registrar = Requirements.=20 >> Exhibit E is the same in each of the three IANA IPR License >> Agreements between the Trust and ICANN, specifically the licenses >> for the IANA Names Services, the IANA Numbers Services and the IANA >> Protocol Parameter Services. >>=20 >> The implementation of the domain name registrar requirements needed >> additional details than in the current Exhibit E. These details have >> been worked out with ICANN, reviewed by the CCG and approved by the >> IETF Trust for this review by the community. >>=20 >> Specifically the proposed changes affect the following: under the >> circumstance where the Administrative and Technical Contacts must >> approve the change to the Technical Contact the Registrar must >> provide notice of a receipt of a request to each to change the >> Technical Contact. >>=20 >> Additionally, under the circumstance where the Registrant (Trust) >> can override the need for the other parties to approve a change to >> the Technical Contact, the Registrant must provide documentation >> that notice of the change was provided to both the Administrative >> and Technical Contacts and that no response was received after a >> period of no less than ten business days. >>=20 >> These conditions are also incorporated under the circumstances where >> the domain is set to prohibit registrar transfers, to prohibit >> deletions, and to remove the configuration to renew the domain >> automatically. >>=20 >> A markup of the License Agreement Exhibit E reflects those proposed >> details and can be found here as Proposed Amendment to License >> Agreements 1 May 17: https://trustee.ietf.org/iana.html >>=20 >> CSC has agreed that it can implement the proposed changes. >>=20 >> It is believed the next steps are: >>=20 >> a. Community Review >> b. Acceptance of proposed changes to Exhibit E by the Trust >> c. Trust and ICANN execute amendments to the three License=20 >> Agreements >> d. Incorporate the changes in CSC Agreement Schedule A >> (Schedule A is the same as Exhibit E of the License Agreements) >> e. Trust puts Schedule A of the CSC Agreement out for Community=20 >> Review=20 >> f. Community Review >> g. Trust executes CSC Agreement >> h. CSC Test of conformance to the requirements=20 >> i. All IANA domains transferred upon successful test >>=20 >> Your feedback by 17 May 2017 on the proposed amendments to Exhibit E >> of the IANA IPR License Agreements and the next steps are >> appreciated. >>=20 >> Thanks. >>=20 >> Kaveh Ranjbar >> Chair >> IETF Trust >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> CCG mailing list >> CCG@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccg = >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Trustees mailing list > Trustees@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trustees = --Apple-Mail=_901C4EBB-2B92-49D5-8B58-7218CC39BE03 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Christopher,

On May 2, 2017, at 2:44 PM, CW = Mail <mail@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:

Good evening:
Thankyou Kaveh Ranjbar for this = information. 
For the avoidance of doubt, may we please have = confirmed that this is about Community Review of the amendments to = Exhibit E that have already been approved by CCG?

Yes.  They = have already been approved by the CCG.

In which case, which Community = entities are being consulted and by whom? 

The Trustees = have an obligation to have community review as was = stated 
as next steps in the prior communications with = the CCG.

I understand that there are no additional = or new amendments proposed in this text. Is that correct?

That is = correct.


May I also suggest that IETF = please cease to use .docx formats because they are incompatible with = Open Office .odt
In this case in point, the text that is = described as a 'markup' contains no edits, redlines or other = markups.

Noted that Open Office doesn=E2=80=99t see = markups.

Ray


(This is a longstanding feature of .docx I am = not inventing anything!)

Regards

Christopher Wilkinson
On 02 May 2017, at 15:43, The IETF Trust = <ietf-trust@ietf.org> wrote:
All;

We are in the process of transferring the IANA domains to the = Trust
from ICANN using CSC as the registrar.

The agreement with CSC requires the = incorporation of the IANA IPR
License Agreements=E2=80=99 = Exhibit E Domain Name Registrar Requirements. 
Exhibit E is = the same in each of the three IANA IPR License
Agreements = between the Trust and ICANN, specifically the licenses
for = the IANA Names Services, the IANA Numbers Services and the IANA
Protocol Parameter Services.

The = implementation of the domain name registrar requirements needed
additional details than in the current Exhibit E. These = details have
been worked out with ICANN, reviewed by the = CCG and approved by the
IETF Trust for this review by the = community.

Specifically the proposed = changes affect the following: under the
circumstance where = the Administrative and Technical Contacts must
approve the = change to the Technical Contact the Registrar must
provide = notice of a receipt of a request to each to change the
Technical Contact.

Additionally, = under the circumstance where the Registrant (Trust)
can = override the need for the other parties to approve a change to
the Technical Contact, the Registrant must provide = documentation
that notice of the change was provided to = both the Administrative
and Technical Contacts and that no = response was received after a
period of no less than ten = business days.

These conditions are also = incorporated under the circumstances where
the domain is = set to prohibit registrar transfers, to prohibit
deletions, = and to remove the configuration to renew the domain
automatically.

A markup of the = License Agreement Exhibit E reflects those proposed
details = and can be found here as Proposed Amendment to License
Agreements 1 May 17: https://trustee.ietf.org/iana.html

CSC has agreed that it can implement the proposed changes.

It is believed the next steps are:

a.  Community Review
b. =  Acceptance of proposed changes to Exhibit E by the Trust
c.  Trust and ICANN execute amendments to the three = License 
= Agreements
d.  Incorporate the changes in CSC = Agreement Schedule A
(Schedule A is the same as = Exhibit E of the License Agreements)
e.  Trust puts = Schedule A of the CSC Agreement out for Community 
= Review 
f.  Community Review
g.  Trust = executes CSC Agreement
h.  CSC Test of conformance to = the requirements 
i.  All IANA domains transferred upon successful test

Your feedback by 17 May 2017 on the proposed = amendments to Exhibit E
of the IANA IPR License Agreements = and the next steps are
appreciated.

Thanks.

Kaveh Ranjbar
Chair
IETF Trust

_______________________________________________
CCG mailing list
CCG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccg

_______________________________________________
Trustees mailing list
Trustees@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trustees

= --Apple-Mail=_901C4EBB-2B92-49D5-8B58-7218CC39BE03-- From nobody Tue May 2 14:02:19 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 445DF126C22 for ; Tue, 2 May 2017 14:02:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qr71Ji4d5j0A for ; Tue, 2 May 2017 14:02:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from authsmtp.register.it (authsmtp32.register.it [81.88.54.73]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B9AB12EAC3 for ; Tue, 2 May 2017 13:59:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.37] ([88.20.144.6]) by paganini32 with id FYzT1v00J08Vkuo01YzTB0; Tue, 02 May 2017 22:59:33 +0200 X-Rid: cw@christopherwilkinson.eu@88.20.144.6 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7216FCB8-44A8-4C03-B8DE-82F9DF26D92D" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) From: CW Mail In-Reply-To: <99DB6EA3-B942-47E1-BB60-43326947DAE1@isoc.org> Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 22:59:19 +0200 Cc: Trustees Trustees , CCG PTI , IETF Announcement list Message-Id: <55FE6802-7C2A-4537-8394-F567D34D4C16@christopherwilkinson.eu> References: <149373262717.9880.7516296670939349912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <99DB6EA3-B942-47E1-BB60-43326947DAE1@isoc.org> To: Ray Pelletier X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [CCG] [Trustees] Proposed Changes to License Agreements between ICANN and IETF Trust X-BeenThere: ccg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IANA IPR Community Coordination Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 21:02:12 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7216FCB8-44A8-4C03-B8DE-82F9DF26D92D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Thankyou, Ray. That is very clear and helpful. On 02 May 2017, at 22:08, Ray Pelletier wrote: > The Trustees have an obligation to have community review as was stated=20= > as next steps in the prior communications with the CCG. I think there are some ambiguities here. At first sight I would suggest = that it is the CCG members who would trigger Community Review. That is why I sought clarification as to which Community entities would = be consulted and by whom. Regards CW --Apple-Mail=_7216FCB8-44A8-4C03-B8DE-82F9DF26D92D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii rpelletier@isoc.org> = wrote:
The Trustees have an obligation to = have community review as was stated 
as = next steps in the prior communications with the = CCG.

I think there are some = ambiguities here. At first sight I would suggest that it is the CCG = members who would trigger Community Review.
That is why I = sought clarification as to which Community entities would be consulted = and by = whom.

Regards

CW

= --Apple-Mail=_7216FCB8-44A8-4C03-B8DE-82F9DF26D92D-- From nobody Wed May 3 09:34:08 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1701129B29 for ; Wed, 3 May 2017 09:34:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.801 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mU3Lham2QPb8 for ; Wed, 3 May 2017 09:34:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89A0B129457 for ; Wed, 3 May 2017 09:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4CB30050D for ; Wed, 3 May 2017 12:31:37 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id paCu_oP0SCcn for ; Wed, 3 May 2017 12:31:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from a860b60074bd.home (pool-108-45-101-150.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.45.101.150]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C710300408; Wed, 3 May 2017 12:31:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Russ Housley Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_72328D3E-B603-4509-A8EE-E3E501F39C49" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 12:31:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <55FE6802-7C2A-4537-8394-F567D34D4C16@christopherwilkinson.eu> Cc: IETF Trustees , CCG PTI To: CW Mail References: <149373262717.9880.7516296670939349912.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <99DB6EA3-B942-47E1-BB60-43326947DAE1@isoc.org> <55FE6802-7C2A-4537-8394-F567D34D4C16@christopherwilkinson.eu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [CCG] [Trustees] Proposed Changes to License Agreements between ICANN and IETF Trust X-BeenThere: ccg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: IANA IPR Community Coordination Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 16:34:08 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_72328D3E-B603-4509-A8EE-E3E501F39C49 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Christopher: >> The Trustees have an obligation to have community review as was = stated=20 >> as next steps in the prior communications with the CCG. >=20 > I think there are some ambiguities here. At first sight I would = suggest that it is the CCG members who would trigger Community Review. > That is why I sought clarification as to which Community entities = would be consulted and by whom. =46rom my perspective, everyone has been consulted in the proper order. The IETF Trust asked the CCG for review before calling for the community = review. This gave the CCG members an opportunity to reach out to anyone = that they thought appropriate at that time. I know that some CCG = members asked for legal review at that time. The IETF Trust has an obligation to ask the community for review before = signing. They are fulfilling that obligation. Russ --Apple-Mail=_72328D3E-B603-4509-A8EE-E3E501F39C49 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Christopher:

The Trustees have an = obligation to have community review as was stated 
as next steps in the prior = communications with the CCG.

I think there are some ambiguities = here. At first sight I would suggest that it is the CCG members who = would trigger Community Review.
That is why I = sought clarification as to which Community entities would be consulted = and by whom.

=46rom my perspective, everyone has been consulted in the = proper order.

The IETF Trust asked = the CCG for review before calling for the community review.  This = gave the CCG members an opportunity to reach out to anyone that they = thought appropriate at that time.  I know that some CCG members = asked for legal review at that time.

The IETF Trust has an obligation to ask the = community for review before signing.  They are fulfilling that = obligation.

Russ

= --Apple-Mail=_72328D3E-B603-4509-A8EE-E3E501F39C49--