[CRISP-TEAM] Suggested Text - III.A.3. Service level agreement (Budget Review)

Bill Woodcock woody at pch.net
Tue Jan 13 18:55:36 CET 2015

> On Jan 13, 2015, at 3:08 AM, Paul Rendek <rendek at ripe.net> wrote:
> I support Andrei's language, clear and concise,  but lets use a
> consistent name (if we agree) as Andrei mentioned. So the text could be:
> "The contract fee is based on costs incurred by the IANA Numbering Services Operator in providing the IANA numbering service.”

Yes, but that sort of thing can be hammered out in the final copyedit, once we’re all sure what uniform terminology we want to use.  Is the “Numbering Services” terminology something that we’re all agreed on?  I hadn’t seen much discussion of it.  I like it, but I worry a little that we’re going to clobber the phrase “functions” which is less descriptive but well-known as a term of art.  If we’re responding to a limited technical audience, “functions” would probably make more sense because it’s what everybody’s used to.  If we want this to be intelligible to laypeople, “Numbering Services” is better.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/crisp/attachments/20150113/2da7056e/signature.asc>

More information about the CRISP mailing list