[CRISP-TEAM] [draft] NRO-NC role in Review Committee

[Andrei Robachevsky]

Agree.

Andrei

Andres Piazza wrote on 30/12/14 15:15:
> Dear Alan,
> 
> I agree 100% with that answer. You can also add that the members of the
> Review Commitee should be appointed by the 5 communities and the final
> report should be considered as advice received by NRO-EC.
> 
> I believe it is important to stand out that the RIRs are eventually
> (NRO) the ones performing oversight (trought contract with IANA
> operator) but having the imput of a Independent Review Committee.
> 
> A.
> 
> El 29/12/14 a las 18:34, Alan Barrett escribió:
>> I volunteered to draft a response about this issue. The
>> following text is my proposal for an answer we can give to the
>> community.
>>
>> [[[
>> Subject: NRO-NC role in Review Committee
>>
>> There has been a suggestion that the work of the "Review Committee"
>> proposed in the CRISP draft should be handled by the NRO-NC, or
>> alternatively, that the chair of the NRO-NC should be co-opted to
>> serve on the Review Committee.
>>
>> The CRISP Team believes that is would be wise to to keep the
>> operational performance review process independent of the policy
>> development process.  Because the NRO-NC (or ASO-AC) has a role in
>> global policy development, we think that the proposed Review Committee
>> should be independent of the NRO-NC.
>>
>> ]]]
>>
>> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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