[CRISP-TEAM] Interim version, not yet checked visually in Word...

Bill Woodcock woody at pch.net
Thu Jan 15 07:32:50 CET 2015

> •     Details of the agreement, including its term and termination
>     conditions,dispute resolution and the need of SLA text to be
>     submitted


> The Internet number community must have free unlimited access to all
> intellectual property rights which are necessary for, or which relate
> to, the continuing provision of the IANA services. Such rights must also
> be available freely, without restriction, to any successor operator of
> the IANA Numbering services.
> The details and expectations of the RIR community on this issue are set
> out in III.A.2.
> I like the general idea of having III.A.3.ix defer to III.A.2 for details about which types of intellectual property should be assigned to which rights holders, so there is no inconsistency between the sections.


>> Section I.B: "The RIRs, not-for-profit membership-based
>> organizations, manage ...".  This is missing the "with elected governing
>> boards" that was present in another section.

The other instances all conclude “…accountable to the community…” so I’ve harmonized this instance with them, rather than to this text, which does not appear elsewhere.

>> This section is also
>> missing the definitions of "NRO" and "NRO EC" that I suggested should be
>> moved to this section, and that I thought received agreement.  See the
>> email thread "Move description of RIRs, NRO, and NRO EC to section I.A"
>> in which I provided a redline file draft-apb-NROEC-RIR.20150113.1.docx
>> with suggested edits.

Done, and removed the now-redundant copy from IV.A.

>> Section III.A.2: The sentence "It is the preference of the RIR community
>> that all relevant parties agree to these expectations as part of the
>> transition" appears twice, buth in a paragraph near the middle, and in a
>> sentence at the end of the last paragraph.

…with different referents.  Not my doing, but it looks intentional to me, and it doesn’t seem problematic, so unless there’s a consensus that we de-dup, I’ll leave it alone.

>> Section III.A.3: "It is expected that RIR staff, as the contractual
>> party of this agreement, will draft the specific language of this
>> agreement." I thought we agreed that "the RIRs", not "RIR staff", would
>> draft the contract.

Okay, changed.

>> Also, could we say "contract" instead of "agreement" here?

No, because (although it wasn’t previously 100% uniform, which I’ve fixed now) our Service Level Agreement is generally referred to in the document as an “agreement,” whereas the NTIA IANA Functions Contract is generally referred to as a “contract.”  Not my idea, but it’s relatively uniform already, so I’ve completed the harmonization in that direction.

>> * Section III.A.4: I think we agreed that "The RIRs shall establish a
>> Review Committee”.


>> * Email thread "Document status inside the document”


>> * Email thread "Change NRO EC to RIRs”


>> * Emaill thread "Move description of RIRs, NRO, and NRO EC to section I.A”,


>> modified by changing "associations" to "organizations”.


>> 9. Section VI.I: After the pargraph saying "Prior to submitting this proposal to the ICG, two drafts were published", add a list or table of dates, URLS for announcements, and URLs for draft documents.

I need someone to generate such a table, which I can insert.

>> 10. Section VI.I: Review the entire section to ensure that it captures the status of recent discussions.

I need someone operating at a higher altitude to do that; I’ll integrate any results.


-------------- 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/20150114/61161087/signature.asc>

More information about the CRISP mailing list