[CRISP-TEAM] [Feedback requested] Discussions on delaying CCWG Timelines

Paul Rendek rendek at ripe.net
Fri Dec 18 21:49:52 CET 2015

I also agree with this approach.


On 12/18/15 3:36 PM, Sweeting, John wrote:
> I agree with the suggestion below, it seems to be a fair and open way to
> go.
> On 12/18/15, 3:58 AM, "crisp-bounces at nro.net on behalf of Izumi Okutani"
> <crisp-bounces at nro.net on behalf of izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:
>> Good suggestion Andrei.
>> We can share the intended response to the ianaxfer list before sending it
>> to the CCWG.
>> I understand your point Andrei, we should be careful, especially when
>> speaking on behalf of the numbers community, which is not directly about
>> the proposal itself.
>> I agree, let's share with the wider numbers community before we make any
>> statement to the CCWG.
>> It is very much in line with what we have been doing throughout the
>> process.
>> Thank you Mwendwa for your feedback to support making our voice on this.
>> What you expressed is along the lines of my thinking, and I think
>> Andrei's suggestion doesn't contradict.
>> Nurani has also expressed support to make a comment.
>> She is now out of office therefore sent me a quick feedback individually.
>> I'll wait to see if there are any other comments until UTC14:30, 24 hours
> >from my request for feedback.
>> If no concerns are expressed I will share it on the ianaxfer list.
>> Feedback continues to be welcome, including further clarifications, or
>> even just an explicit support.
>> Thanks,
>> Izumi
>> On 2015/12/18 17:31, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
>>> Thank you Izumi,
>>> Izumi Okutani wrote on 18/12/15 04:27:
>>>> Does this additional background change your opinion or do you still
>>>> feel the same?
>>>> (If you still feel the same, fair enough and I understand)
>>> I understand and agree that the overall timeline is important, my
>>> concern is that we are overstretching our own mandate. But I also see
>>> Mwendwa's point the the CRISP Team is de-facto an informal voice of the
>>> numbers community as far as the transition is concerned.
>>> Perhaps we should share the intended reply on the iana-xfer list prior
>>> to sending it to the CCWG?
>>> Regards,
>>> Andrei
>> _______________________________________________
>> CRISP mailing list
>> CRISP at nro.net
>> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
> ________________________________
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp

More information about the CRISP mailing list