[CRISP-TEAM] Response Richard Hill's comment to icg-forum
Kivuva at transworldafrica.com
Wed Feb 4 14:28:51 CET 2015
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
"There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on
higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson
On 4 February 2015 at 12:19, Andrei Robachevsky <robachevsky at isoc.org>
> Excellent response, Izumi. Fully support.
> Izumi Okutani wrote on 03/02/15 20:22:
> > CRISP Team,
> > This is another draft response sent to icg-forum - this is the comments
> > submitted by Richard Hill.
> > I welcome your feedback until UTC 19:30 4th Feb.
> > Izumi
> > ----
> > Dear ICG members,
> > On 20 January 2015 Richard Hill wrote to the icg-forum list with a
> > number of concerns about the CRISP team process. The concerns expressed
> > by Mr Hill were considered in depth during the CRISP team proposal
> > development process and had been discussed on the ianaxfer mailing list
> > with Mr Hill as well as other community members.
> > The positions taken by the CRISP team was based on the consensus
> > position of the community.
> > Richard Hill wrote:
> >> Certain legal questions were raised in discussions on the CRISP
> > mailing list
> >> (NRO IANAXFER), in particular regarding jurisdiction and dispute
> > resolution.
> >> The CRISP team apparently did not include anybody who had appropriate
> > legal
> >> expertise and it chose not to request outside legal expertise, see:
> >> https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000322.html
> > Mr Hill's objections to the position adopted by the CRISP team were well
> > documented in his emails to the ianaxfer mailing list, and were
> > discussed at length on the CRISP teleconferences (notes and audio
> > archives of these calls are available at https://nro.net/crisp-team).
> > Additionally, they were included in the CRISP team's matrix of community
> > comments and concerns posted at:
> > https://www.nro.net/crisp-iana-xfer-summary-discussion-08012015
> > The CRISP team's final position is effectively summarised in the text of
> > our response to the ICG RFP:
> > "The RIRs, as the contractual party of this agreement, will draft the
> > specific language of this agreement. During the drafting process, the
> > RIRs are expected to consult their respective RIR communities, and that
> > the drafting process will be guided by the principles listed below."
> > [Response to the ICG RFP on the IANA from the Internet Number Community,
> > p11]
> > The RFP response then lists 11 IANA Service Level Agreement Principles.
> > This was based on taking into account of feedback on the ianaxfer
> > mailing list, to bring the proposal back to describing high level
> > principles.
> > The CRISP team's position took into account the concerns raised by Mr
> > Hill, and addressed some points he has raised, such as describing in the
> > proposal that RIRs are expected to consult their respective RIR
> > communities, as quoted earlier.
> > The CRISP Team was also informed by other feedback received via the
> > ianaxfer mailing list, particularly those mails which explicitly
> > supported the approach of delegating contract authorship to the RIR
> > legal teams. Posts by Hans Petter Holen (7 Jan,10 Jan) Seun Ojedeji (7
> > Jan) Gerard Ross (11 January), Jim Reid (12 January), Andrew Dul (12
> > January) and Dmitry Burkov (13 January) specifically endorsed this view.
> > All of these mails can be read at:
> > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/date.html
> > A further concern noted by Mr Hill:
> >> That is, how can NTIA be expected to approve a proposal when important
> >> details are left open and have not been reviewed or endorsed by the
> >> multi-stakeholder community?
> > The CRISP team has crafted a proposal that reflects the value that the
> > community places on the number-related IANA functions. This is reflected
> > in the proposal to safeguard the RIR communities' stewardship over these
> > functions via a contractual relationship.It is the responsibility of the
> > parties to a contract to negotiate a contract. The CRISP team believes
> > that by directing the RIRs to consult with their communities and by
> > laying down the principles mentioned above, we have established a
> > framework within which the RIR legal staff can effectively negotiate in
> > the best interests of the community.
> > Finally, Mr Hill has expressed that "there was limited input and the
> > outcome was largely influenced by the CRISP team and the RIR staff". As
> > noted above, there were numerous posts to the ianaxfer mailing list,
> > many of which touched specifically on the issues discussed by Mr Hill.
> > From 17 October 2014 to 29 January 2015 there were 372 mails to the
> > ianaxfer list and 134 subscribers - information on the list is available
> > at: https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
> > I hope that this is a useful explanation of the CRISP team's position in
> > regard to the issues raised by Mr Hill. I am of course happy to discuss
> > any of these issues in greater depth if this would be helpful.
> > Yours sincerely,
> > Izumi Okutani
> > Chair, the CRISP Team
> > _______________________________________________
> > CRISP mailing list
> > CRISP at nro.net
> > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CRISP