[CRISP-TEAM] Comment from Richard Hill Fwd: RE: [NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA Stewardship Proposal: Final Call for Comments
apb at cequrux.com
Fri Jan 9 09:13:13 CET 2015
On Fri, 09 Jan 2015, Nurani Nimpuno wrote:
> Hi Izumi,
> You are very quick! (The rest of us are trying to keep up with
> your amazing speed. :)
>> 3) Why the option of having NRO as an operator is not considered
> This has certainly been tossed around as a comment several
> times. And when comparing to other communities, the point has
> been made that the numbering community really is the only one
> that could actually manage quite easily without IANA.
I have heard the idea that the NRO could take over if ICANN
failed, or if the RIRs became dissatisfied with ICANN. I have not
heard the idea that the NRO should take over now.
> But two things:
> 1. There has been strong emphasise on stability and
> continuity. Changing operator now would involve a lot of
> moving parts and doing this now would jeopardise the stability
> and continuity. However, laying the ground for that future
> possibility (not putting in place clauses that bind us forever
> to ICANN) as important.
> 3. The NRO is not a legal entity. (And it doesn't have a
> well-resources office.) It is not ready *today* to take this
> task on. Rushing to get the NRO ready for this would not be
I think that the NRO could take over almost immediately, but that's not
the point. I think that main point is that we want stability, and we
are satisfied with ICANN's performance.
>> 5) Community cannot approve this part of the transition plan
>> without an SLA text
> Agreed. We are not the RIRs and we are not lawyers.
> However, it is of course assumed that the RIR's legal teams get
> together and produce such a contract, before the transition
> takes place.
Perhaps we should say something like that in the document?
>> I personally feel it would be helpful if we could say a little
>> more than this, such as the idea is to have the SLA completed
>> before the transition and we are listing high level principles
>> as its reference. Then again, this may go back to the point
>> discussed at the 9th call, we shouldn't mention anything we
>> cannot be control/outside our role.
Oh, Izumi also suggested saying that in the document.
--apb (Alan Barrett)
More information about the CRISP