Fwd: [CCG] Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect
Dear Russ: Thankyou, Noted. For my part, I need a certain period to confer and consult before furnishing a considered reply, particularly as this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future. As you will have already noticed, this Season is not the best for deciding anything. I suggest that we work towards a scheduled and properly prepared inclusive meeting towards mid-January. With the Seasons' Greetings Christopher
Begin forwarded message:
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Subject: [CCG] Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect Date: 18 December 2025 at 21:08:55 CET To: ccg@ietf.org
As indicated by the attached note, the amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
Since the CCG was unable to determine a time when we could meet this week with all nine members present, I suggest that the CCG work on a letter to the IETF Trust over email.
I think that there are three points that are needed:
1. Consent to transfer of IANA IPR.
2. Previous agreements with IETF Trust still stand,
3. A statement of displeasure with the process.
Regarding item 2, I think we want to explicitly support a novation agreement. A novation agreement is a three-party legal contract that replaces an original contract by substituting a new party for one of the original parties, transferring all rights and obligations to the new party and releasing the original party from liability. The previous agreements are:
- The IANA IPR Assignment Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR Community Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Names Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Numbers Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Protocol Parameter Services, dated 1 October 2016
Regarding item 3, the final part of the ALAC letter seems to reflect our view.
Does any CCG member have things to add or remove from this approach?
Russ
From: The IETF Trust <ietf-trust@ietf.org> Subject: [tlp-interest] Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments Date: December 18, 2025 at 2:07:55 PM EST To: "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org> Cc: tlp-interest@ietf.org Reply-To: tlp-interest@ietf.org
Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments
On December 10, 2025, after reviewing community comments received, the Directors of the IETF Intellectual Property Management Corporation (IPMC) voted to adopt the bylaws amendments proposed in October 2025 and submitted to the community for the bylaws-mandated 60-day comment period[1].
These amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
The current IPMC Bylaws along with the complete history of the IETF IPMC Bylaws are available at: https://www.ietf-ipm.org/administration/bylaws/
The IETF IPMC Directors thank everyone who took the time to submit comments on the proposed amendments. In addition to supporting the proposed amendments, some commenters suggested bylaws changes above and beyond the proposal. The IETF IPMC directors intend to review and give consideration to the additional suggestions submitted. Please note that any resulting new proposed amendments themselves will be subject to a future 60-day comment process.
The comments received are posted in the IETF TLP-INTEREST mailing archive[2].
[1] Original notice: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/SWYX5CDJciD6W9qNsxmNaK-s... [2] TLP-INTEREST archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tlp-interest/
Regards, Glenn Deen, IPMC President on behalf of the IPMC Board of Directors
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
Dear Christopher, Could you elaborate on how this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future? I seem to recall that all other members of the CCG have already done the necessary consideration, and all but you confirm that, pending the changes' approval, would be given. It may be that others and I have missed something, so it would be great if you could share your remaining concerns. Sincerely, Hans Petter Holen NRO EC Chair 2025 -hph On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 at 23:36, mail@christopherwilkinson.eu < mail@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
Dear Russ:
Thankyou, Noted.
For my part, I need a certain period to confer and consult before furnishing a considered reply, particularly as this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future. As you will have already noticed, this Season is not the best for deciding anything.
I suggest that we work towards a scheduled and properly prepared inclusive meeting towards mid-January.
With the Seasons' Greetings
Christopher
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> *Subject: **[CCG] Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect* *Date: *18 December 2025 at 21:08:55 CET *To: *ccg@ietf.org
As indicated by the attached note, the amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
Since the CCG was unable to determine a time when we could meet this week with all nine members present, I suggest that the CCG work on a letter to the IETF Trust over email.
I think that there are three points that are needed:
1. Consent to transfer of IANA IPR.
2. Previous agreements with IETF Trust still stand,
3. A statement of displeasure with the process.
Regarding item 2, I think we want to explicitly support a novation agreement. A novation agreement is a three-party legal contract that replaces an original contract by substituting a new party for one of the original parties, transferring all rights and obligations to the new party and releasing the original party from liability. The previous agreements are:
- The IANA IPR Assignment Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR Community Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Names Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Numbers Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Protocol Parameter Services, dated 1 October 2016
Regarding item 3, the final part of the ALAC letter seems to reflect our view.
Does any CCG member have things to add or remove from this approach?
Russ
*From: *The IETF Trust <ietf-trust@ietf.org> *Subject: **[tlp-interest] Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments* *Date: *December 18, 2025 at 2:07:55 PM EST *To: *"IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org> *Cc: *tlp-interest@ietf.org *Reply-To: *tlp-interest@ietf.org
Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments
On December 10, 2025, after reviewing community comments received, the Directors of the IETF Intellectual Property Management Corporation (IPMC) voted to adopt the bylaws amendments proposed in October 2025 and submitted to the community for the bylaws-mandated 60-day comment period[1].
These amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
The current IPMC Bylaws along with the complete history of the IETF IPMC Bylaws are available at: https://www.ietf-ipm.org/administration/bylaws/
The IETF IPMC Directors thank everyone who took the time to submit comments on the proposed amendments. In addition to supporting the proposed amendments, some commenters suggested bylaws changes above and beyond the proposal. The IETF IPMC directors intend to review and give consideration to the additional suggestions submitted. Please note that any resulting new proposed amendments themselves will be subject to a future 60-day comment process.
The comments received are posted in the IETF TLP-INTEREST mailing archive[2].
[1] Original notice: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/SWYX5CDJciD6W9qNsxmNaK-s... [2] TLP-INTEREST archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tlp-interest/
Regards, Glenn Deen, IPMC President on behalf of the IPMC Board of Directors
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
Folks - At this point I would ask that everyone complete their consideration and that any objections be sent in email. In this way, we may all consider them and then the CCG can be polled for its consensus view on the matter. Thanks! /John On Dec 19, 2025, at 2:16 AM, Hans Petter Holen <hph@ripe.net> wrote: Dear Christopher, Could you elaborate on how this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future? I seem to recall that all other members of the CCG have already done the necessary consideration, and all but you confirm that, pending the changes' approval, would be given. It may be that others and I have missed something, so it would be great if you could share your remaining concerns. Sincerely, Hans Petter Holen NRO EC Chair 2025 -hph On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 at 23:36, mail@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:mail@christopherwilkinson.eu> <mail@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:mail@christopherwilkinson.eu>> wrote: Dear Russ: Thankyou, Noted. For my part, I need a certain period to confer and consult before furnishing a considered reply, particularly as this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future. As you will have already noticed, this Season is not the best for deciding anything. I suggest that we work towards a scheduled and properly prepared inclusive meeting towards mid-January. With the Seasons' Greetings Christopher Begin forwarded message: From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com<mailto:housley@vigilsec.com>> Subject: [CCG] Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect Date: 18 December 2025 at 21:08:55 CET To: ccg@ietf.org<mailto:ccg@ietf.org> As indicated by the attached note, the amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect. Since the CCG was unable to determine a time when we could meet this week with all nine members present, I suggest that the CCG work on a letter to the IETF Trust over email. I think that there are three points that are needed: 1. Consent to transfer of IANA IPR. 2. Previous agreements with IETF Trust still stand, 3. A statement of displeasure with the process. Regarding item 2, I think we want to explicitly support a novation agreement. A novation agreement is a three-party legal contract that replaces an original contract by substituting a new party for one of the original parties, transferring all rights and obligations to the new party and releasing the original party from liability. The previous agreements are: - The IANA IPR Assignment Agreement, dated 1 October 2016 - The IANA IPR Community Agreement, dated 1 October 2016 - The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Names Services, dated 1 October 2016 - The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Numbers Services, dated 1 October 2016 - The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Protocol Parameter Services, dated 1 October 2016 Regarding item 3, the final part of the ALAC letter seems to reflect our view. Does any CCG member have things to add or remove from this approach? Russ From: The IETF Trust <ietf-trust@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-trust@ietf.org>> Subject: [tlp-interest] Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments Date: December 18, 2025 at 2:07:55 PM EST To: "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-announce@ietf.org>> Cc: tlp-interest@ietf.org<mailto:tlp-interest@ietf.org> Reply-To: tlp-interest@ietf.org<mailto:tlp-interest@ietf.org> Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments On December 10, 2025, after reviewing community comments received, the Directors of the IETF Intellectual Property Management Corporation (IPMC) voted to adopt the bylaws amendments proposed in October 2025 and submitted to the community for the bylaws-mandated 60-day comment period[1]. These amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect. The current IPMC Bylaws along with the complete history of the IETF IPMC Bylaws are available at: https://www.ietf-ipm.org/administration/bylaws/ The IETF IPMC Directors thank everyone who took the time to submit comments on the proposed amendments. In addition to supporting the proposed amendments, some commenters suggested bylaws changes above and beyond the proposal. The IETF IPMC directors intend to review and give consideration to the additional suggestions submitted. Please note that any resulting new proposed amendments themselves will be subject to a future 60-day comment process. The comments received are posted in the IETF TLP-INTEREST mailing archive[2]. [1] Original notice: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/SWYX5CDJciD6W9qNsxmNaK-s... [2] TLP-INTEREST archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tlp-interest/ Regards, Glenn Deen, IPMC President on behalf of the IPMC Board of Directors _______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org<mailto:ccg@ietf.org> To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org<mailto:ccg-leave@ietf.org> _______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org<mailto:ccg@ietf.org> To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org<mailto:ccg-leave@ietf.org> _______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
We are absolutely ready to approve this. Barry On Mon, Dec 22, 2025 at 11:18 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
Folks -
At this point I would ask that everyone complete their consideration and that any objections be sent in email.
In this way, we may all consider them and then the CCG can be polled for its consensus view on the matter.
Thanks! /John
On Dec 19, 2025, at 2:16 AM, Hans Petter Holen <hph@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear Christopher,
Could you elaborate on how this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future?
I seem to recall that all other members of the CCG have already done the necessary consideration, and all but you confirm that, pending the changes' approval, would be given.
It may be that others and I have missed something, so it would be great if you could share your remaining concerns.
Sincerely,
Hans Petter Holen NRO EC Chair 2025
-hph
On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 at 23:36, mail@christopherwilkinson.eu <mail@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
Dear Russ:
Thankyou, Noted.
For my part, I need a certain period to confer and consult before furnishing a considered reply, particularly as this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future. As you will have already noticed, this Season is not the best for deciding anything.
I suggest that we work towards a scheduled and properly prepared inclusive meeting towards mid-January.
With the Seasons' Greetings
Christopher
Begin forwarded message:
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Subject: [CCG] Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect Date: 18 December 2025 at 21:08:55 CET To: ccg@ietf.org
As indicated by the attached note, the amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
Since the CCG was unable to determine a time when we could meet this week with all nine members present, I suggest that the CCG work on a letter to the IETF Trust over email.
I think that there are three points that are needed:
1. Consent to transfer of IANA IPR.
2. Previous agreements with IETF Trust still stand,
3. A statement of displeasure with the process.
Regarding item 2, I think we want to explicitly support a novation agreement. A novation agreement is a three-party legal contract that replaces an original contract by substituting a new party for one of the original parties, transferring all rights and obligations to the new party and releasing the original party from liability. The previous agreements are:
- The IANA IPR Assignment Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR Community Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Names Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Numbers Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Protocol Parameter Services, dated 1 October 2016
Regarding item 3, the final part of the ALAC letter seems to reflect our view.
Does any CCG member have things to add or remove from this approach?
Russ
From: The IETF Trust <ietf-trust@ietf.org> Subject: [tlp-interest] Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments Date: December 18, 2025 at 2:07:55 PM EST To: "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org> Cc: tlp-interest@ietf.org Reply-To: tlp-interest@ietf.org
Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments
On December 10, 2025, after reviewing community comments received, the Directors of the IETF Intellectual Property Management Corporation (IPMC) voted to adopt the bylaws amendments proposed in October 2025 and submitted to the community for the bylaws-mandated 60-day comment period[1].
These amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
The current IPMC Bylaws along with the complete history of the IETF IPMC Bylaws are available at: https://www.ietf-ipm.org/administration/bylaws/
The IETF IPMC Directors thank everyone who took the time to submit comments on the proposed amendments. In addition to supporting the proposed amendments, some commenters suggested bylaws changes above and beyond the proposal. The IETF IPMC directors intend to review and give consideration to the additional suggestions submitted. Please note that any resulting new proposed amendments themselves will be subject to a future 60-day comment process.
The comments received are posted in the IETF TLP-INTEREST mailing archive[2].
[1] Original notice: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/SWYX5CDJciD6W9qNsxmNaK-s... [2] TLP-INTEREST archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tlp-interest/
Regards, Glenn Deen, IPMC President on behalf of the IPMC Board of Directors
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
No objections from my side. Best, Maarten Van: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> Verzonden: maandag 22 december 2025 17:18 Aan: mail@christopherwilkinson.eu; Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>; Hans Petter Holen <hph@ripe.net>; Glenn Deen <gdeen@ietf-trust.org> CC: ccg@ietf.org; cpwg@icann.org Onderwerp: [CCG] Re: Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect Folks - At this point I would ask that everyone complete their consideration and that any objections be sent in email. In this way, we may all consider them and then the CCG can be polled for its consensus view on the matter. Thanks! /John On Dec 19, 2025, at 2:16 AM, Hans Petter Holen <hph@ripe.net<mailto:hph@ripe.net>> wrote: Dear Christopher, Could you elaborate on how this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future? I seem to recall that all other members of the CCG have already done the necessary consideration, and all but you confirm that, pending the changes' approval, would be given. It may be that others and I have missed something, so it would be great if you could share your remaining concerns. Sincerely, Hans Petter Holen NRO EC Chair 2025 -hph On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 at 23:36, mail@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:mail@christopherwilkinson.eu> <mail@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:mail@christopherwilkinson.eu>> wrote: Dear Russ: Thankyou, Noted. For my part, I need a certain period to confer and consult before furnishing a considered reply, particularly as this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future. As you will have already noticed, this Season is not the best for deciding anything. I suggest that we work towards a scheduled and properly prepared inclusive meeting towards mid-January. With the Seasons' Greetings Christopher Begin forwarded message: From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com<mailto:housley@vigilsec.com>> Subject: [CCG] Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect Date: 18 December 2025 at 21:08:55 CET To: ccg@ietf.org<mailto:ccg@ietf.org> As indicated by the attached note, the amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect. Since the CCG was unable to determine a time when we could meet this week with all nine members present, I suggest that the CCG work on a letter to the IETF Trust over email. I think that there are three points that are needed: 1. Consent to transfer of IANA IPR. 2. Previous agreements with IETF Trust still stand, 3. A statement of displeasure with the process. Regarding item 2, I think we want to explicitly support a novation agreement. A novation agreement is a three-party legal contract that replaces an original contract by substituting a new party for one of the original parties, transferring all rights and obligations to the new party and releasing the original party from liability. The previous agreements are: - The IANA IPR Assignment Agreement, dated 1 October 2016 - The IANA IPR Community Agreement, dated 1 October 2016 - The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Names Services, dated 1 October 2016 - The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Numbers Services, dated 1 October 2016 - The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Protocol Parameter Services, dated 1 October 2016 Regarding item 3, the final part of the ALAC letter seems to reflect our view. Does any CCG member have things to add or remove from this approach? Russ From: The IETF Trust <ietf-trust@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-trust@ietf.org>> Subject: [tlp-interest] Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments Date: December 18, 2025 at 2:07:55 PM EST To: "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-announce@ietf.org>> Cc: tlp-interest@ietf.org<mailto:tlp-interest@ietf.org> Reply-To: tlp-interest@ietf.org<mailto:tlp-interest@ietf.org> Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments On December 10, 2025, after reviewing community comments received, the Directors of the IETF Intellectual Property Management Corporation (IPMC) voted to adopt the bylaws amendments proposed in October 2025 and submitted to the community for the bylaws-mandated 60-day comment period[1]. These amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect. The current IPMC Bylaws along with the complete history of the IETF IPMC Bylaws are available at: https://www.ietf-ipm.org/administration/bylaws/ The IETF IPMC Directors thank everyone who took the time to submit comments on the proposed amendments. In addition to supporting the proposed amendments, some commenters suggested bylaws changes above and beyond the proposal. The IETF IPMC directors intend to review and give consideration to the additional suggestions submitted. Please note that any resulting new proposed amendments themselves will be subject to a future 60-day comment process. The comments received are posted in the IETF TLP-INTEREST mailing archive[2]. [1] Original notice: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/SWYX5CDJciD6W9qNsxmNaK-s... [2] TLP-INTEREST archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tlp-interest/ Regards, Glenn Deen, IPMC President on behalf of the IPMC Board of Directors _______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org<mailto:ccg@ietf.org> To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org<mailto:ccg-leave@ietf.org> _______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org<mailto:ccg@ietf.org> To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org<mailto:ccg-leave@ietf.org> _______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org<mailto:ccg@ietf.org> To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org<mailto:ccg-leave@ietf.org>
Christopher: Unless you can articulate an explicit concern, I'm strongly opposed to a lack of action that will force the IETF Trust to remain in existence into the new year. We were told more than six months ago of the intent to transfer all assets before the end of 2025 and close the IETF Trust. There is a cost to the continued existence of the IETF Trust into 2026, and we should not impose cost. Based on the letter from the ALAC Chair, that part of the community is fine with the asset transfer, even though they are not happy with the process that got to this point. Russ
On Dec 18, 2025, at 5:36 PM, mail@christopherwilkinson.eu wrote:
Dear Russ:
Thankyou, Noted.
For my part, I need a certain period to confer and consult before furnishing a considered reply, particularly as this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future. As you will have already noticed, this Season is not the best for deciding anything.
I suggest that we work towards a scheduled and properly prepared inclusive meeting towards mid-January.
With the Seasons' Greetings
Christopher
Begin forwarded message:
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Subject: [CCG] Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect Date: 18 December 2025 at 21:08:55 CET To: ccg@ietf.org
As indicated by the attached note, the amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
Since the CCG was unable to determine a time when we could meet this week with all nine members present, I suggest that the CCG work on a letter to the IETF Trust over email.
I think that there are three points that are needed:
1. Consent to transfer of IANA IPR.
2. Previous agreements with IETF Trust still stand,
3. A statement of displeasure with the process.
Regarding item 2, I think we want to explicitly support a novation agreement. A novation agreement is a three-party legal contract that replaces an original contract by substituting a new party for one of the original parties, transferring all rights and obligations to the new party and releasing the original party from liability. The previous agreements are:
- The IANA IPR Assignment Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR Community Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Names Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Numbers Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Protocol Parameter Services, dated 1 October 2016
Regarding item 3, the final part of the ALAC letter seems to reflect our view.
Does any CCG member have things to add or remove from this approach?
Russ
From: The IETF Trust <ietf-trust@ietf.org> Subject: [tlp-interest] Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments Date: December 18, 2025 at 2:07:55 PM EST To: "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org> Cc: tlp-interest@ietf.org Reply-To: tlp-interest@ietf.org
Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments
On December 10, 2025, after reviewing community comments received, the Directors of the IETF Intellectual Property Management Corporation (IPMC) voted to adopt the bylaws amendments proposed in October 2025 and submitted to the community for the bylaws-mandated 60-day comment period[1].
These amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
The current IPMC Bylaws along with the complete history of the IETF IPMC Bylaws are available at: https://www.ietf-ipm.org/administration/bylaws/
The IETF IPMC Directors thank everyone who took the time to submit comments on the proposed amendments. In addition to supporting the proposed amendments, some commenters suggested bylaws changes above and beyond the proposal. The IETF IPMC directors intend to review and give consideration to the additional suggestions submitted. Please note that any resulting new proposed amendments themselves will be subject to a future 60-day comment process.
The comments received are posted in the IETF TLP-INTEREST mailing archive[2].
[1] Original notice: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/SWYX5CDJciD6W9qNsxmNaK-s... [2] TLP-INTEREST archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tlp-interest/
Regards, Glenn Deen, IPMC President on behalf of the IPMC Board of Directors
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
Good afternoon : The letter from ALAC to the CCG co-chairs approves the transfer of the IANA IPR to the IPMC, which – as far as I am concerned – was the question that was asked. What more do you need ? For all the rest, at this point I have neither a brief nor an opinion. In so far that there is a shortage of time, that is entirely down to the actions and inactions of the IETF. If a CCG vote is called before the end of this year, I shall positively abstain. My concerns? Well, Yes, I have some concerns relating to what we have learnt from this sorry story for the future of IPMC as a whole. These relate to transparency and accountability in general and specifically to the necessary policies, procedures and rules to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again with the IPMC. With the Seasons’ Greetings Christopher Wilkinson At Large CCG member
On 22 Dec 2025, at 17:01, Russ Housley via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Christopher:
Unless you can articulate an explicit concern, I'm strongly opposed to a lack of action that will force the IETF Trust to remain in existence into the new year. We were told more than six months ago of the intent to transfer all assets before the end of 2025 and close the IETF Trust. There is a cost to the continued existence of the IETF Trust into 2026, and we should not impose cost. Based on the letter from the ALAC Chair, that part of the community is fine with the asset transfer, even though they are not happy with the process that got to this point.
Russ
On Dec 18, 2025, at 5:36 PM, mail@christopherwilkinson.eu wrote:
Dear Russ:
Thankyou, Noted.
For my part, I need a certain period to confer and consult before furnishing a considered reply, particularly as this will influence the way in which IETF and CCG conduct our business in the future. As you will have already noticed, this Season is not the best for deciding anything.
I suggest that we work towards a scheduled and properly prepared inclusive meeting towards mid-January.
With the Seasons' Greetings
Christopher
Begin forwarded message:
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Subject: [CCG] Amended IPMC Bylaws are in Effect Date: 18 December 2025 at 21:08:55 CET To: ccg@ietf.org
As indicated by the attached note, the amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
Since the CCG was unable to determine a time when we could meet this week with all nine members present, I suggest that the CCG work on a letter to the IETF Trust over email.
I think that there are three points that are needed:
1. Consent to transfer of IANA IPR.
2. Previous agreements with IETF Trust still stand,
3. A statement of displeasure with the process.
Regarding item 2, I think we want to explicitly support a novation agreement. A novation agreement is a three-party legal contract that replaces an original contract by substituting a new party for one of the original parties, transferring all rights and obligations to the new party and releasing the original party from liability. The previous agreements are:
- The IANA IPR Assignment Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR Community Agreement, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Names Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Numbers Services, dated 1 October 2016
- The IANA IPR License Agreement for IANA Protocol Parameter Services, dated 1 October 2016
Regarding item 3, the final part of the ALAC letter seems to reflect our view.
Does any CCG member have things to add or remove from this approach?
Russ
From: The IETF Trust <ietf-trust@ietf.org> Subject: [tlp-interest] Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments Date: December 18, 2025 at 2:07:55 PM EST To: "IETF Announcement List" <ietf-announce@ietf.org> Cc: tlp-interest@ietf.org Reply-To: tlp-interest@ietf.org
Conclusion of the 60 day comment period on the October 2025 IPMC Proposed Amendments
On December 10, 2025, after reviewing community comments received, the Directors of the IETF Intellectual Property Management Corporation (IPMC) voted to adopt the bylaws amendments proposed in October 2025 and submitted to the community for the bylaws-mandated 60-day comment period[1].
These amended IPMC Bylaws are now in effect.
The current IPMC Bylaws along with the complete history of the IETF IPMC Bylaws are available at: https://www.ietf-ipm.org/administration/bylaws/
The IETF IPMC Directors thank everyone who took the time to submit comments on the proposed amendments. In addition to supporting the proposed amendments, some commenters suggested bylaws changes above and beyond the proposal. The IETF IPMC directors intend to review and give consideration to the additional suggestions submitted. Please note that any resulting new proposed amendments themselves will be subject to a future 60-day comment process.
The comments received are posted in the IETF TLP-INTEREST mailing archive[2].
[1] Original notice: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/SWYX5CDJciD6W9qNsxmNaK-s... [2] TLP-INTEREST archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tlp-interest/
Regards, Glenn Deen, IPMC President on behalf of the IPMC Board of Directors
_______________________________________________ CCG mailing list -- ccg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccg-leave@ietf.org
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list -- cpwg@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to cpwg-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (7)
-
Barry Leiba -
Hans Petter Holen -
John Curran -
Maarten Simon -
mail＠christopherwilkinson.eu -
Russ Housley -
tjw ietf