[CRISP-TEAM] [Call for comments] Maximum Review Interval Term to be 3 years

Izumi Okutani izumi at nic.ad.jp
Wed Jan 7 08:24:43 CET 2015

Alan and CRISP Team,

> I suggested three years in a message on 16 December, and did not receive
> any comments.  This interval is not based on any existing practice,

I see and noted. I must have overlooked this message. My apologies.

> is simply what I thought would be reasonable.
> I note that the the existing NTIA/ICANN IANA contract has a duration of
> three years, and that the ICANN bylaws require review of ICANN
> structures (including the ASO) at least every five years.
> Perhaps it would make sense to tie reviews to contract renewals?
> Something like this:
> [[[
> Such reviews shall be conducted at some time during the last 12 months
> of the term of the proposed contract or its successors, or at any time
> on request from the Boards of at least two of the RIRs, and shall in any
> case be conducted not less than once every three years.
> ]]]

Excellent. This makes sense to me!

I'm comfortable that we can explain the rationale for three years with
this text, while I continue to welcome feeback from CRISP Team.


More information about the CRISP mailing list