[CRISP-TEAM] Fwd: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] NRO-NC role in Review Committee

[Izumi Okutani]

Let's disucss this at the call today, together with comment from Hand
Petter.



Izumi


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] NRO-NC role in Review Committee
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 21:35:34 +0100
From: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
To: Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com>
CC: ianaxfer at nro.net

Hello Alan,

May I request the CRISP team inform us about how the review is presently
carried out, to help understand what we are trying to transition; What
tasks exactly does NTIA carry out presently in the review process as it
relates to numbers?
Secondly, while I have no major concern about creating a review team,(if
there is more consensus in favour of that route) I think using the
rationale of separating policy from operations (in this context) is not
enough. The NRO NC at the moment does not only do policy issues it already
does operational activities like appointing ICANN board members, developing
procedures for conducting business in support of their responsibilities et
all

As I have said in my previous mail, separation in this context is by
process and not by team(individual). If the process says the NRO-NC would
also handle review of IANA operations, it does not in anyway mean there is
no separation. (Unless we think the NRO NC team have no knowledge of IANA
operations as it relates to numbers, which will be interesting to know).

Nevertheless, if the review team route still suffice, I will like to add a
few more suggestions

-  Size of team be determined in this process
- manner of selection be determined in this process and should be uniform
across RIR
- The charter of the team be determined before concluding the transition

Regards

sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 31 Dec 2014 14:01, "Alan Barrett" <apb at cequrux.com> wrote:

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.

The draft proposal says "The NRO Executive Council shall establish a Review
Committee that will advise and assist the NRO Executive Council in its
periodic review. Any such Review Committee should be a team composed of
representatives from each RIR region ...". The CRISP Team has not discussed
how many members the Review Committee might have, or what procedure the NRO
EC might follow in choosing the members.

--apb (Alan Barrett)

_______________________________________________
ianaxfer mailing list
ianaxfer at nro.net
https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer



-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
ianaxfer mailing list
ianaxfer at nro.net
https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer