[CRISP-TEAM] Review Committee

Sweeting, John john.sweeting at twcable.com
Mon Dec 22 13:54:29 CET 2014

I also agree with Alan on this one

On 12/22/14, 7:47 AM, "Andrei Robachevsky" <robachevsky at isoc.org> wrote:

>I agree with Alan. Policy development and the IANA service are two
>different areas that must not overlap.
>Alan Barrett wrote on 22/12/14 13:27:
>> On Mon, 22 Dec 2014, Mwendwa Kivuva wrote:
>>> I was of the view that we should give NRO NC the function of the review
>>> committee. The reasoning is:
>>> 1. No burden of constituting a different body. NRO NC is already
>>> established.
>>> 2. NRO NC is representative of all RIRs and established in ICANN as
>>> ASO AC
>>> 3. The burden of review committee is minimal and can be a running
>>> item in ASO AC regular meetings.
>> I prefer to keep them separate.  The NRO-NC/ASO-AC is involved with
>> policy development, but the Review Committee would be involved in
>> monitoring the performance after policy is ratified.  These are very
>> different roles.
>> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>> _______________________________________________
>> CRISP mailing list
>> CRISP at nro.net
>> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
>CRISP mailing list
>CRISP at nro.net

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.

More information about the CRISP mailing list