[CRISP-TEAM] the initial draft announcement

[Paul Rendek]

Hello Craig,

Thanks for your reply, I have commented in the text to following.

On 12/17/14 12:37 PM, Craig Ng wrote:
> On 17/12/2014 9:35 pm, "Paul Rendek" <rendek at ripe.net
> <mailto:rendek at ripe.net>> wrote:
>
>     The table of proposals the column for ARIN includes a point to
>     'Reaffirm commitments'. It is not clear what commitments this
>     point makes reference to. Is is reaffirming commitment to the IANA
>     operator? I am not sure this is necessary as there will be a new
>     contract here. Is it reaffirming commitments to the IETF or
>     another body? If so, I think that needs to be clearly stated in
>     the notes below the table.
>
>
> This is not a matter of "necessity". The chart is simply a reflection,
> and summary, of the proposal made by each RIR to its community. In the
> case of ARIN, it reflects the draft proposal of ARIN as contained in
> its draft response to the ICG's RFP. 
>
> Please note that the table is simply a high level summary of where
> RIRs have a common proposal, and where they differ. It is not intended
> to fully reflect, in detail, each RIR's proposal.

After the CRISP call I think my point here was answered, there was
considerable debate and I see the text is being re-drafted so I look
forward to the re-draft from Michael.

> I do not wish to have a distracting argument here about the NRO. But
> if this is going to be an issue, as is evident here, then perhaps we
> need to deal with this issue, and nip this in the bud.

Thanks for the explanation here. I also do not think we need to talk
about the NRO and I think that every RIR can subscribe to the the five
RIRs, so in this light I would appreciate it if the text could be changed.


>
>
>
> I have no issue with removing the words "broad based".

Regards,
Paul

>
>
> Regards
> Craig
>
>
>
>
>
>     On 12/17/14 12:17 AM, Craig Ng wrote:
>>     The updated document is attached. It now incorporate ARIN's proposals (and
>>     AFRINIC's, as requested by Ernest) in the chart. You will note, of course,
>>     that the ARIN's proposal was originally described in the body of the
>>     document (under the heading "Accommodating the differences").
>>
>>     If you have no objection to this, then I will ask German to replace the
>>     current document on the NRO website with this one.
>>
>>     Craig
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 17/12/2014 10:06 am, "Craig Ng" <craig at apnic.net> wrote:
>>
>>>     On 17/12/2014 8:50 am, "Izumi Okutani" <izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:
>>>
>>>>     Thanks John very much for letting me know.
>>>>
>>>>>     Is it possible to edit and correct the summary? ARIN�s proposal dated
>>>>>     21
>>>>>     November 2014 was published to ARIN�s transition list and made
>>>>>     available
>>>>>     on the NRO-IANAXFER list on November 28 yet this summary does not
>>>>>     mention
>>>>>     it nor does it compare it in the chart.
>>>>     Let's make sure to reflect the summary which includes ARIN community.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Craig,
>>>>     may I confirm whether you are happy to work on this revision, or prefer
>>>>     someone from ARIN region to edit the updated version on this summary?
>>>>
>>>     Hi John, Izumi
>>>
>>>     Yes, I am happy to edit the document. Apologies for not capturing ARIN's
>>>     proposal. I intend to make a post-script edit to the document, and
>>>     circulate it to make sure you're happy with it.
>>>
>>>     Thanks
>>>     Craig
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     CRISP mailing list
>>     CRISP at nro.nethttps://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/crisp/attachments/20141217/2edb20bd/attachment.html>