[CRISP-TEAM] Draft Notes CRISP 2nd Teleconference

Mon Dec 15 03:23:15 CET 2014

Hi

I have incorporated Andrei and Izumi comments.

Same on December 9th notes (Andrei)

Last version of the minutes are published now in the website. (also in
attachment)

German

-----Original Message-----
From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp>
Date: Monday, 15 December 2014 12:11 pm
To: "crisp at nro.net" <crisp at nro.net>
Subject: Re: [CRISP-TEAM] Draft Notes CRISP 2nd Teleconference

>Thank you German and LACNIC staff for the notes of the 2nd teleconference.
>
>I appreciate the initiative in trying to post the notes as quickly as
>possible and apologies for getting back to you late.
>
>*If* there is still time to accomodate the changes, I would like to
>especially clarify the part below.
>i.e., clarify there was a general acceptance of the compromised idea
>shared by Craig in accomodating regional differences.
>
> > CN explained the differences among the AOC, SLA and MONC remarked on
>the document.
>
>(add)
>CN explained a compromised proposal, accomodating regional differences.
>
> > IO asked the CRISP Members to give an input from the perspective of
>each region.
> >
>
>There was general acceptance of this approach explained by CN. None of
>the team member voiced an objection to this approach.
>
>In addition, each CRIPS Team members shared observation in from their
>regions as below.
>
> > AB from AFRINIC region explained that there is no formal proposal in
>the region and underlined that
> > the community identified some important aspects to be included
>(bottom-up process, documentation,
> > addition languages other than English and satisfied with SLA or MOU)
> >
> > MA highlighted some important subjects such as stability and SLA.
> >
> > EL agreed with the draft as a starting point and underlined the
>importance of the MONC for the
> > LACNIC community.
>
>Please see inline for more minor commments on other parts (three parts).
>
>
>
>>
>> CRISP Teleconference held on Thursday, December 11th 2014 ( 13.00
>> UTC)
>>
>> 0. Welcome
>> 1. Agenda Review
>>
>> 2. Actions Review
>> Action I: GV to create a private, closed mailing list for CRISP members
>>as soon as possible.
>> Action II: GV to update Micheal´s draft CRISP timeline
>> Action III: Craig, Andrei, Michael and Esteban to prepare and share a
>>first draft of the document.
>> Action IV: GV to gather proposals in each RIR regions and post on NRO
>>website.
>> 3. Discussions about the draft proposal
>> a) Briefing from the initial draft volunteers
>> b) Discussions
>> 4. Drafting tool(s)
>> a) Agree on the tool to use
>> 5 Reconfirm next steps & schedules
>> a) Timeline to fix 1st draft as CRISP team
>> b) Communications with respective RIR regions c )The next call date
>> 6 AOB
>>
>> 7 Adjourn.
>> CRISP members present:
>>
>> AFRINIC
>> Alan P. Barrett, AB Mwendwa Kivuva, MK Ernest Byaruhanga, EB (
>> APNIC
>> Izumi Okutani, IO
>> Craig Ng, CN
>>
>>
>> ARIN
>> Michael Abejuala, MA John Sweeting JS
>>
>> LACNIC
>> Esteban Lescano, EL Nico Scheper, NS Andres Piazza AP
>>
>> RIPE NCC
>> Nurani Nimpuno, NN Andrei Robachevsky, AR
>>
>> 1. Agenda Review
>>
>> No agenda items were added.
>>
>> 2. Actions Review
>>
>> IO presented and reviewed the agenda and the four actions items
>>proposed during the last meeting.
>> All the actions were done.
>>
>> Action II: https://www.nro.net/nro-and-internet-governance/iana-
>> oversight/consolidated-rir-iana-stewardship-proposal-team-crisp-team
>>
>> Action IV: https://www.nro.net/nro-and-internet-governance/iana-
>> oversight/timeline-for-rirs-engagement-in-iana-stewardship-transition-
>>process
>>
>> IO encouraged all the RIRs to share the information above within their
>>communities as APNIC has
>> already done.
>
>share the information above --> share key updated about developing the
>proposal by CRISP team
>
>----
>IO encouraged all the RIRs to share key updated about developing the
>proposal by CRISP team within their communities as APNIC has already done.
>----
>
>> 3. Discussions about the draft proposal
>>
>> a) Briefing from the initial draft volunteers
>> b) Discussions
>>
>> IO suggested that AR and MA share the essence of the proposal.
>>
>> AR underlined that the proposal was based on high-level principles that
>>RIPE community discussed
>> during the past months. He recommended looking for the gaps and
>>absences that NTIA- ICANN contract
>> has and
>>
>>
>> trying to fill them.
>>
>> AR described the content in each section (1-6 ) of the draft proposal
>>and highlighted that section
>> 3 has a simple and straightforward approach, seeing the IANA services
>>separated from the policy
>> development process.
>>
>> In relation to section 6 AR underlined that RIPE is the only RIR that
>>has completed the community
>> process.
>>
>> IO thanked AR for the information shared on the draft and asked MA to
>>add any further explanation.
>>
>> MA agreed with all the explanations given by AR. In addition he pointed
>>out that the information of
>> the ARIN community survey was included in the draft and underlined that
>>the draft was a good
>> starting point.
>>
>> IO thanked to MA and asked CN to make a brief summary of the
>>similarities and differences among the
>> 3 proposals circulated between APNIC, RIPE and LACNIC.
>>
>> CN explained the differences among the AOC, SLA and MONC remarked on
>>the document.
>>
>> IO asked the CRISP Members to give an input from the perspective of
>>each region.
>>
>> AB from AFRINIC region explained that there is no formal proposal in
>>the region and underlined that
>> the community identified some important aspects to be included
>>(bottom-up process, documentation,
>> addition languages other than English and satisfied with SLA or MOU)
>>
>> MA highlighted some important subjects such as stability and SLA.
>>
>> EL agreed with the draft as a starting point and underlined the
>>importance of the MONC for the
>> LACNIC community.
>>
>> CN clarified NN questions about the role of the NRO in this process. CN
>>explained that the NRO is
>> just a coordination body for the 5 RIR. CN remarked on the idea that 5
>>RIRs work as a group and not
>> separately. CN said that the signatories of the new agreement would be
>>the 5 RIR. In addition he
>> highlighted that APNIC proposal is based in AOC and SLA and that their
>>community is satisfied with
>> those concepts.
>>
>
>(add)
>
>CN clarified IO's question about how much of details have been
>considered about NRO representatives to review SLA including criteria of
>review. CN explained this is the stage the basic concept has been shared
>and no objections observed.
>
>> After a brief discussion about the NRO EC role in all this process and
>>how they will take notice of
>> the report and recommendations of this group, AR clarified about the
>>internal structure related to
>> the SLA within the IETF.
>>
>> 4. Drafting tool(s)
>>
>> a) Agree on the tool to use
>>
>> IO concluded that all RIRs agreed and are satisfied with the draft
>>proposed and asked for
>> volunteers to continue working on the draft.
>
>  IO concluded --> IO observed
>
>> CN suggested that the 4 volunteers proposed in the 1st Teleconference
>>continue with the draft and
>> all of the agreed.
>
>Perhaps this part makes more sense to move under "b) Discussions"
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>---------------
>IO concluded that all RIRs agreed and are satisfied with the draft
>proposed and asked for volunteers to continue working on the draft.
>
>CN suggested that the 4 volunteers proposed in the 1st Teleconference
>continue with the draft and all of the agreed.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>---------------
>
>> AR suggested having just one person (MA) editing the document in order
>>to have consistency.
>>
>> MA agreed in being the editing person.
>>
>> EL suggested a process of working between the 4 volunteers; first
>>sharing the information between
>> them and then sharing with the rest of the CRISP Team.
>>
>> 5 Reconfirm next steps & schedules
>>
>> a) Timeline to fix 1st draft as CRISP team
>>
>> IO reconfirmed that December 18th will be published the first draft to
>>ianaxfer mailing list and
>> suggested that CRISP team members could provide feedback to MA until
>>December 16th so the 1st draft
>> could be finished by December 17th.
>>
>> Action item: CRISP team members to provide feedback to MA until 16
>>December.
>>
>> Action item: MA will finish the draft on December 17th.
>>
>> b) Communications with respective RIR regions
>>
>> After a brief discussion about the use of the mailing lists (Crisp and
>>Ianaxfer) and about opening
>> the archives or not, it was decided to use the CRISP mailing list just
>>for internal coordination
>> and generate the
>>
>> discussion in the global mailing list in order to avoid confusions and
>>be
>> transparent.
>> On the other hand, AB proposed a compromise to open the archives in the
>>CRISP mailing list at the
>> end of producing the first draft.
>>
>> AK and NN agreed with AB.
>
>No objections expressed to AB's proposal by other members.
>
>
>> GV clarified that the role of the NRO in this process was a facilitator
>>of the process. He added
>> that the CRISP team members own this process.
>> AR suggested to share documents with the community either as an online
>>publication or PDF format.
>>
>> C) Next call date
>>
>> CRISP team members agreed in having next Teleconference on December
>>17th                        C.
>> C.
>
>Thank,
>Izumi
>
>(2014/12/12 18:54), German Valdez wrote:
>> Dear CRISP Team
>>
>> Thanks to LACNIC staff for providing the attached notes.
>>
>> For you perusal, draft notes of yesterday teleconference.
>>
>> Please advise on comments, additions, changes you���d like to be
>>incorporated.
>>
>> Here in +10 UTC, its finalising business day, Maybe if you can review
>>the notes at yout COB today I could share it in the ianaxfer mailing
>>list and published them in the website during the weekend (including
>>your comments)
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> German
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CRISP mailing list
>> CRISP at nro.net
>> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CRISP mailing list
>CRISP at nro.net
>https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CRISP December 9 meeting DRAFT NOTES v2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 87607 bytes
Desc: CRISP December 9 meeting DRAFT NOTES v2.pdf
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/crisp/attachments/20141215/4ea814cc/CRISPDecember9meetingDRAFTNOTESv2.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CRISP December 11 meeting DRAFT NOTES v2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 64871 bytes
Desc: CRISP December 11 meeting DRAFT NOTES v2.pdf
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/crisp/attachments/20141215/4ea814cc/CRISPDecember11meetingDRAFTNOTESv2.pdf>