(I tried do search trough the archives and found this only deep within the 2013-03 discussion.) The ASO Address Council was made aware of - and had a short discussion with one of the author on - the topic of the proposed update to RFC 2050. The current version of the draft is at http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt Below is the messages I have found on the topic on the ARIN ppml which explains the background of the work in progress. Personally I think this is a long overdue cleanup of RFC2050 - and the Address Policy working-group should perhaps spend some time on follwing the development of the document to get the workings right. Hans Petter

*From:* John Curran <jcurran@arin.net <mailto:jcurran@arin.net>> *Date:* March 17, 2013, 2:57:17 PM PDT *To:* CJ Aronson <cja@daydream.com <mailto:cja@daydream.com>> *Cc:* "arin-ppml@arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net>" <arin-ppml@arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net>> *Subject:* *Re: [arin-ppml] Update to RFC2050*

On Mar 17, 2013, at 4:57 PM, CJ Aronson <cja@daydream.com <mailto:cja@daydream.com>> wrote:

...

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.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-housley-rfc2050bis-00.txt

Thanks Cathy! Let me add some more background -

We've known for quite some time that RFC 2050 (describing the structure of the Internet Registry system and its initial policies back in days of Jon Postel) has become rather outdated with time, and yet we did not want it to be made "historic" without a successor document (due to the various references in the Internet community)

What was needed is a revised document reflecting just the high-level principles and agreements for the Internet address registry system. As an informational document, such an updated statement of current state of affairs could serve as a useful successor and replacement for RFC 2050. I will note that the last time such an effort was attempted within the IETF (circa 2003), there was some confusion over whether the goal was documenting "as is" versus "as it should be", and ultimately did not reach productive conclusion.

So, a few of us (Russ Housley, myself, Geoff Huston, and David Conrad) took it upon ourselves to draft a suitable replacement document, and we have now completed the task. We also took the time to have the draft reviewed by the execs from the other RIRs, folks in the IAB, IESG, and ISOC, as well as list of folks who have had strong involvement in the Registry System over the years (Scott Bradner, Randy Bush, etc.) The resulting document should be an accurate representation of the current "as is" state of the Internet Number Registry System as far as we can determine, including having references to the agreements defining the structure and primary relationships.

The document is available here:

<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-housley-rfc2050bis-00.txt>

The announcement of the draft has been posted to the "ietf" mailing list for further discussion (and more information on the "ietf" list is available here: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>)

Thanks! /John

John Curran President and CEO ARIN _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net <mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net>). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact info@arin.net <mailto:info@arin.net> if you experience any issues.