[ih] IP addresses are not phone numbers, was Some Questions over IPv4 Ownership

[Vint Cerf]

ISOC does not get into the middle of allocations and assignments -
that's officially the role of IETF and sometimes IAB, both of which
function under the auspices of but not the direction of ISOC.

vint



On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Dave CROCKER <dhc2 at dcrocker.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/18/2010 1:31 AM, Tony Li wrote:
>>
>> Am I incorrect?  The documents that I can find claim that routing and
>> addressing are both architecturally under the IETF.  As that's not a legal
>> entity, the relevant parent is ISOC.
>
>
> Ah, ok.  The 'isoc has authority over the ietf' model.
>
> I think you meant that the IETF is not incorporated.  As I understand it,
> there are a number of unincorporated legal entities (with the most familiar
> being Doing Business As -- DBA.)  I'm told that they do have legal standing.
>  (One of the discussions on this topic included an attorney telling us all
> what the legal term was for an original, IETF-styled arrangement but I
> forget what it was.
>
> Of course, now that there is the IETF Trust, even the IETF has an
> incorporated component (albeit only designed for handling IPR.)
>
> ISOC's oversight is extremely constrained and pertains strictly to process
> -- although their approval of an IAB Nomcom slate does sometimes get rather
> more substantive.
>
> I believe administrative delegations come from IETF standards.  I had not
> heard that ISOC got into the middle of such processes.
>
> d/
>
>
> --
>
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
>