[CRISP-TEAM] Draft Notes CRISP 2nd Teleconference

Mon Dec 15 04:20:56 CET 2014

Thanks German for sharing the updated versions swiftly.

Notes for the 1st teleconference:
I'm fine with it.
If Andrei is OK, please go ahead an replace with the newer version.

Notes for the 2nd teleconference:
I confirmed all my suggested changes are reflected.

Please go ahead and post it (2nd teleconference) within your business 
hour if no futher comments.

Thanks,
Izumi

(2014/12/15 11:23), German Valdez wrote:
> 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
>