[CRISP-TEAM] Message to the community: What would be helpful when sharing your input

[Nurani Nimpuno]

I think this is a good idea. 
Thanks,
Nurani

On 8 jan 2015, at 20:00, Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:

> CRISP Team,
> 
> 
> We have receive a comment on the list.
> 
> Perhaps it helps to clarify what would be helpful for us, while not
> sounding restrictive.
> 
> Do you think it helps to provide a guidance like this?
> I will wait until the next 12h, UTC7:00 for your feedback.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Izumi
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: What would be helpful when sharing your input
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> 
> As you are aware, the timeline for the next step in developing the final
> proposal to the ICG is very short and we would like to be as effective
> as possible in considering your inputs.
> 
> For your reference, following are a few points which would be helpful
> when sharing your input, for the CRISP Team to understand your position
> adequately and effectively during this short period.
> 
> * Do you generally support the concept of each of the proposed
>   elements listed in Setion III A (1)-(4) (*)
>   (While you may have additional inputs about some details)
> 
> * If you are sharing an opinion which are contrary to discussions
>   which had been taking place on the <ianaxfer at nro.net> list with no
>   further objections expressed, or CRISP Team has formed a position,
>   do you feel strong enough to reconsider? If so, what are the
>   implications you are concerned about in case this point was not
>   reconsidered?
> 
> * If you are stating a strong preference to a certain direction on an
>   issue, what is the reason? If it is not incorporated, what are the
>   consequences you are concerned about?
> 
> Lastly, if you are raising a point, which you don't feel strongly but
> raising for the consideration, it would be a helpful reference if you
> could clearly state this when making your comment, as several people
> have already done on this mailing list.
> 
> 
> ---
> (*) Proposed elements listed in Setion III
> ---
>   (1) ICANN to continue as the IANA functions operator on number
>       resources;
>   (2) Intellectual property rights (IPR) related to the provision of
>       the IANA services stay with the community;
>   (3) Service level agreement with the IANA functions operator on
>       number resources; and
>   (4) Establishment of a Review Committee, with representatives from
>       each RIR, to advise the NRO EC on the review of the IANA
>       functions operator’s performance and meeting of identified
>       service levels.
> ---
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Izumi Okutani
> CRISP Team
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp