Here's a good message from the IANAPLAN list of the IETF related to the trademark and domain issue: -----Original Message----- From: Ianaplan [mailto:ianaplan-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 10:07 AM Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] ICG request concerning IANA trademark and iana.org domain name The current model is to have ICANN be viewed as a contractor for IANA services. Remarkably, this view seems to be held by more than one of the affected communities. I say remarkably because getting alignment on strategic issues, between entities like the IETF and the RIRs seems unusual to me. In any event, contractors should not 'own' resources that properly belong to the those contracting with them. More generally, an arrangement with a contractor should be devised so as to facilitate possible transfer of the contracting relationship to a different provider. Any arrangement which 'defers' basic matters of control until the termination phase is inviting transfer problems. By 'inviting' I mean that it is guaranteeing there will be serious problems. My plan is that we do the normal and reasonable and responsible work of anticipating the transfer now, rather than taking an escapist stance that what we arrange now doesn't matter. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Ianaplan mailing list Ianaplan@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan