<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<div>
<div>On Mar 17, 2013, at 4:57 PM, CJ Aronson <<a href="mailto:cja@daydream.com">cja@daydream.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">There is a current IETF draft to update RFC205. Since that RFC is near and dear to all of us I thought folks might want the link.
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a href="http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-housley-rfc2050bis-00.txt">http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-housley-rfc2050bis-00.txt</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<div>Thanks Cathy! Let me add some more background -</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We've known for quite some time that RFC 2050 (describing the structure of </div>
<div>the Internet Registry system and its initial policies back in days of Jon Postel) </div>
<div>has become rather outdated with time, and yet we did not want it to be made </div>
<div>"historic" without a successor document (due to the various references in the </div>
<div>Internet community)</div>
<div><br>
What was needed is a revised document reflecting just the high-level principles <br>
and agreements for the Internet address registry system. As an informational<br>
document, such an updated statement of current state of affairs could serve as </div>
<div>a useful successor and replacement for RFC 2050. I will note that the last time </div>
<div>such an effort was attempted within the IETF (circa 2003), there was some </div>
<div>confusion over whether the goal was documenting "as is" versus "as it should </div>
<div>be", and ultimately did not reach productive conclusion.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So, a few of us (Russ Housley, myself, Geoff Huston, and David Conrad) took</div>
<div>it upon ourselves to draft a suitable replacement document, and we have now </div>
<div>completed the task. We also took the time to have the draft reviewed by the </div>
<div>execs from the other RIRs, folks in the IAB, IESG, and ISOC, as well as list </div>
<div>of folks who have had strong involvement in the Registry System over the </div>
<div>years (Scott Bradner, Randy Bush, etc.) The resulting document should be</div>
<div>an accurate representation of the current "as is" state of the Internet Number </div>
<div>Registry System as far as we can determine, including having references </div>
<div>to the agreements defining the structure and primary relationships. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The document is available here:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> <<a href="http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-housley-rfc2050bis-00.txt">http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-housley-rfc2050bis-00.txt</a>></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The announcement of the draft has been posted to the "ietf" mailing list for </div>
<div>further discussion (and more information on the "ietf" list is available here:</div>
<div><<a href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf</a>>)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks!</div>
<div>/John</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>John Curran</div>
<div>President and CEO</div>
<div>ARIN</div>
</body>
</html>