[CRISP-TEAM] IV.A "no changes" is inaccurate

[Paul Rendek]

Hi,

I agree with Alan here.

Paul


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.
>
> and:
>
>    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
>    authority.
>
> 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
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp