[CRISP-TEAM] the Review Committee: Comment from Seun Ojedeji Fwd: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA Stewardship Proposal: Final Call for Comments

[Izumi Okutani]

On 2015/01/12 16:48, Alan Barrett wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jan 2015, Izumi Okutani wrote:
>> Seun Ojedeji has asked us a question on why our draft proposal doesn't
>> specify the Review Committee will be selected in the manner similar to
>> NRO NC. He doesn't seem to have further comments for my explaination and
>> making the suggestion below:
>>
>>  - uniforum membership requirement
>>  - uniform selection process
>>
>> My observation is that this should be left to each RIR region.
>>
>> However, we can perhaps state a common principle in the selection of the
>> Review Committe such as :
>>
>> ---
>> The selection of the Review Committe members should be conducted in an
>> open, transparent, bottom up process, appropriate for each RIR region.
>> There should be equal representation from from each RIR region in
>> constituting the Review Committee.
>> ---
> 
> That principle is fine.
> 
> Seun also suggested that, instead of saying that "the NRO EC" shall
> create a Review Committee, the document should give that responsibility
> to "the RIRs" or "the RIR communities".  I'd also be fine with that
> change.

I don't feel strongly about this, except for ensuring selection of the
Review committee is to be conducted by RIR communities, and this is my
observation.

To me, since NRO EC will be conducting the SLA review, it makes sense
for NRO EC to set up the Review Commitee and the selection be left to
the RIR communities.

I'm also fine with the RIRs, as an equivalent of this but I think we
should be consistent in the word we use, to avoid confusion.

I'm not sure how it would be possible for RIR communities to set up a
Review Committee as a procedural matter, in defining the call for
nominations, nomination procedures, etc.

> More generally, in other cases where we say that the NRO EC will do 
> something, we could consider saying "the RIRs".  The cases that come to 
> mind are: deciding to move the IANA function away from ICANN in the 
> future (section III.A.1), last paragraph "the NRO EC may in the future 
> determine ..."); periodic review of the service level (section III.A.4 
> fisrt paragraph "the NRO EC will conduct periodic reviews"); creation of 
> the Review Committee (section III.A.4 second paragraph "The NRO EC shall 
> establish a Review Committee").

Strongly agree. This seems to be causing confusions.
Alternatively, I'm also fine with describing in brackets such as :

 NRO    (a coordinating body for the five)
 NRO EC (The chief executives of the five RIRs)

Izumi

> --apb (Alan Barrett)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp