comment on Consultation on Internet Number Resources Performance Standards

[McTim]

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Ron Wickersham <rjw at itsmyinternet.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Dec 2012, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just submitted a private comment on
>> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/iana-kpis-20nov12-en.htm
>>
>> http://forum.icann.org/lists/iana-kpis/msg00000.html
>>
>> Would be interested to know if anyone thinks I missed the point.  I feel
>> it is possible i did, since I thought the report was relatively vacuous.
>> But of course that means I might be the one who is vacant.
>>
>> I think there is still a day of so left if anyone else want to comment on
>> this.  It isn't related to names, but it is related to IANA doing its
>> function and putting out performance reports.  I thought it was sad that no
>> one had sent in a comment.  So I tried.
>>
>> avri
>
>
> hi Avri and all,
>
> i am similarly confused by the "consultation" referred to in the document
> (November 2012) _Consultation on Internet Number Resources Performance
> Standards_, a short .pdf document.    within the document itself, there
> appears to be no date other then November 2012, but my pdf reader shows
> the document may have meta-data of "20Nov12".
>
> i am also concerned that the participants within ICANN nor the implied
> externat "consultantcy" were not identified.

The ICANN community are the external consultants it seems.

The notice just says "hey, we think these ought to be the kpi's for
the numbers part of the IANA contract, what do you think!?"

>
> most concerning, however, is the delay in publishing the public announcement
> of allocations.  the data should be published simultaneously with the
> allocations because filtering of unallocated (rogue self-assignments by
> unauthorized spammers, crackers, etc. is good defense by ISP's and
> end users.  when addresses are delegated, they should no longer be
> blocked.   there is no explanation of why up to a two-business-day delay
> should be a transparancy goal.

These addresses are going to RIRs, (and eventually end-users via
ISPs).  In other words, IANA registry gets updated first, then the RIR
is informed, then the RIR can allocate as needed.

There will be a several month lag time between IANA allocation and
ISPs getting the prefixes.

@ Avri, is it sad, or is it an indication that the IANA is doing it's
job pretty well?  I read it last week, but had no
comments/improvements to make on the procedures/KPIs, so I didn't
comment.

--
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel