27 Feb
2016
27 Feb
'16
3:46 p.m.
It might be good to talk about the new name of PTI. Do we think we need to be explicit that whatever the name is, all services remain at iana.org?
--
Andrew Sullivan
Please excuse my clumbsy thums.
> On Feb 26, 2016, at 23:47, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
>
> Please suggest agenda items for the next call on 29 Feb 2016.
>
> I see the following items in the notes from the previous meeting on 15 Feb:
>
>
> * Announcement to operational communities that they may view the draft in Google Docs at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oR3nmHl1fK7BEWOBK65KyvnmhTJZX70j9q4Ne9i4ad4/edit?usp=sharing.
>
> * Tentative acceptance of non-controversial edits
>
> * Edit the document to explicitly give ICANN the right to sublicense rights to PTI.
>
> * Edit the document to say that the IETF Trust will be registrant and admin contact, and ICANN will be tech contact. (Do we need to re-open that discussion, making ICANN only the tech contact and the Trust both registrar and admin contact?)
>
> * Edit the document to outline the requirements for multiple approvals for any change.
>
> * Edit the document to say that the IANA IPR Governance Council (“IIGC”) will have 3 representatives from each operational community.
>
> * Edit the document to clarify that exclusive licences will be restricted to use of the IPR in connection with provision of the IANA functions.
>
> * Edit the document to mention the cases of IANA registries not managed by ICANN, and non-IANA registries managed by the ICANN IANA department.
>
>
> Alan Barrett
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Iana-ipr mailing list
> Iana-ipr@nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr