[CRISP-TEAM] IV.A "no changes" is inaccurate
rendek at ripe.net
Wed Jan 14 08:35:19 CET 2015
I agree with Alan here.
On 1/14/15 7:20 AM, Alan Barrett wrote:
> Section IV.A says:
> The shift from the existing contractual arrangement to another
> contractual arrangement (perhaps relying on a set of distinct
> contracts) covering the IANA functions operator’s ongoing
> management of all the IANA functions should result in no
> operational change for management of the global Internet
> number resource pools. This will help minimize any operational
> or continuity risks associated with stewardship transition.
> The necessary agreement proposed for IANA Numbering Services
> Operator for the IANA Number Registries can be established
> well before the NTIA target date for transition (September
> 2015), as there are no changes to existing service levels
> or reporting that are being proposed, only a change in
> contracting party to align with the delegated policy
> I think that the "no operational change" in the first paragraph quoted
> above is accurate, but the "no changes" in the second quoted paragraph
> (the last paragraph of the section) is inaccurate.
> I think that there will be changes to the service level agreement as
> we move from an SLA with the NTIA, to an SLA with the RIRs; and there
> will be changes to reporting as we move from reporting to the NTIA, to
> reporting to the RIRs.
> I propose to say "no significant changes" instead of "no changes" in
> the last paragraph.
> --apb (Alan Barrett)
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
More information about the CRISP