[CRISP-TEAM] Review committee

Alan Barrett apb at cequrux.com
Mon Jan 5 12:52:59 CET 2015


The comments from JPNIC (see mail from MAEMURA Akinori <maem at nic.ad.jp>
dated 29 Dec 2014, Subject "JPNIC's comment for CRISP's initial draft")
make several suggestions about the review committee.o

[[[
  b. Review Committee
     We believe it is important to ensure Review Committee provides
     adequate advice with a certain level of understanding on the IANA
     function on number resources.  Receiving advice on the service
     level with inadequate knowledge could even risk its service level
     to deteriorate.

   We therefore propose to have requirements for representatives to
   Review Committee to have sufficient knowledge in reviewing the
   IANA function on number resources. In addition, it may be useful
   to have rough guidelines on the role and key points of review, to
   share a common understanding and secure quality of the advice above
   a certain level.

   Lastly, we believe members of Review Committee must be selected by
   the community of each RIR region, such as in the form of elections
   conducted for NRO NC(ASO AC). NRO EC should not be involved in
   its selection to allow Review Committee to provide impartial
   advice to NRO EC, representing the RIR communities.
]]]

I think that the three points for us are to:

- consider making a statement about the qualifications of the review
  committee members;
- consider defining rough guidelines on key points for the review;
- consider specifying the process for aappointing the review committee
  members.

--apb (Alan Barrett)




More information about the CRISP mailing list