[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.
but
> 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.
Thanks,
Izumi
More information about the CRISP
mailing list