RE: [gnso-rn-wg] second try IANA and ICANN-related names

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Additions may have to be made to reserved names list over time, but if
that is the case, there will always be the issue of grandfathering of
those names that were registered prior to the new requirement.
Therefore, I personally think that additions to lists should only be
considered when there is very strong justification.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 2:51 PM
> To: Reserved Names Working Group ICANN
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rn-wg] second try IANA and ICANN-related names
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The question I have related to IANA reserved names is what 
> the reaction would be to the ISOC BOT, IAB or IESG asking 
> that another name be added to the reserved list.  For 
> example, if they were to ask IANA to add IASA, or IAD to the 
> reserved list (surprised they haven't yet), would IANA accept 
> such a request and what would the process be?
> 
> To go further if an IETF WG  were to get an RFC approved that 
> contained a set of new suggested reserved names, how would 
> this be handled.  Or, if the IESG were to request that the 
> names such as IETF- Routing (or IETF-xxx where xxx = any wg 
> name or area name), would that be accepted automatically and 
> by virtue of IANAs acceptance be granted addition to the 
> official reserved names list?
> 
> Perhaps my question is whether we are talking about 
> grandfathering in the current IANA list, or whether we are 
> treating the IANA list as included by reference with 
> additions up to IANA?
> 
> thanks.
> a.
> 
> 
> 
> On 7 feb 2007, at 15.53, Timothy Denton wrote:
> 
> > The copy you received may have been imperfect. So we try again.
> >
> > --
> > Timothy Denton, BA, BCL
> > 37 Heney Street
> > Ottawa, Ontario
> > Canada K1N 5V6
> > www.tmdenton.com
> > 1 613 789 5397
> > Eastern time zone
> >
> > <ICANN and IANA reserved names.doc>
> 
>