Re: newIANA (was Fram behind closed doors via opaque channels)

["Jim Fleming" <JimFleming@unety.net>]

-----Original Message-----
From: vinton g. cerf <vcerf@MCI.NET>
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>; brian@hursley.ibm.com
<brian@hursley.ibm.com>; me@hursley.ibm.com <me@hursley.ibm.com>;
discussion-draft@giaw.org <discussion-draft@giaw.org>;
anybody@hursley.ibm.com <anybody@hursley.ibm.com>; Stef@nma.com
<Stef@nma.com>; ietf@ietf.org <ietf@ietf.org>;
DOMAIN-POLICY@lists.internic.net <DOMAIN-POLICY@lists.internic.net>;
comments@iana.org <comments@iana.org>; Iana@iana.org <Iana@iana.org>;
List@giaw.org <List@giaw.org>; newcase.atr@usdoj.gov <newcase.atr@usdoj.gov>
Date: Saturday, July 11, 1998 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: newIANA (was Fram behind closed doors via opaque channels)


>Masataka,
>
>my impression is that the WP was pretty open about the
>leadership/oversight of the new IANA and only recommended
>that the organization be incorporated in the US.
>
>Is the site of incorporation an issue in your view?
>


The White Paper makes it clear that the existing IANA
(i.e. Jon Postel et. al.) are to be the base to build from.
As I have said, I do not agree with that decision but I
also can not change that decision. I doubt that anyone
can change that decision at this point in time. Instead,
I think that people have to work with it and try to build
what they want on the foundation that the White House
was forced into selecting...


Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com