[CRISP-TEAM] Status update

[Bill Woodcock]

> Are any of those issues still outstanding now?

I wish the answer to that were clearer, but I think it’s high time we closed version 8, so I’m going to just be all optimistic and say “yes."

> 
>> - The glossary is long, probably too long to go at the top of the document, and contains as-yet undefined items.
> 
> I think we agreed to omit anything that doesn't yet have a definition, move it to an appendix, and add a note at the top telling people about the appendix.  I haven't seen a proposal for the exact text at the top..

Done.

>> - The rampant variations of open/transparent/bottoms-up need to be harmonized.
> We agreed on "open, transparent, and bottom-up”.

Done.

>> - Whether or not to include the reference to Bermuda is (I think) waiting on a reply from Andrei.
> I think he replied.  Omit the reference to Bermuda or ICC rules in III.A.3.

Done.

>> - The intellectual property issue is waiting on specific text, though everybody is expressing goodwill about it.
> I sent a message with a copy of the agreed text.

Andrei’s was the last change (as I detailed in a separate email).  Can you tell me whether you’re okay with Andrei’s text, or if you’re proposing separate text that I should go looking through your mail for?

> 
>> - There was text about the RIRs serving the Internet Number Community that Paul and Nurani objected to but didn’t suggest an alternative.
> 
> Nurani sent a copy of the agreed text.

Yes, well, you all keep asserting agreement, and then sending me different things.  I’ve cobbled together a compromise between your various suggestions, with typo and punctuation correction, that’s in there now, that I hope will prove sufficient.

> 
>> - There was a sentence about a third-party holder of IP that Paul wanted simplified, I proposed an alternative, haven’t heard back from anyone. Haven’t checked to see if it clobbers the other IP issue or vice-versa yet.
> 
> Nurani sent a copy of Paul's text.  I replied to your suggestion.

Uh…  Dammit.  I updated it with the text you sent, "Future transitions will be smoother if intellectual property assets are held by an organization that is not the IANA Numbering Services Operator.”  This was between you and Paul.  I’ll assume that what’s there is good enough, and that Paul won’t object too much if we move forward with it.  Rather than trying to figure out which of Nurani’s emails has that in it.


> Dr. Govind’s name

Done.

>> - Alan suggested text “elect individuals to the governing board” but didn’t specify where it should go.
> 
> As I said last time you asked this, there's a sentence in II.B.3.ii that says "members have the right to vote individuals onto the governing board".  I suggest to change that to "members have the right to elect individuals to the governing board".  Essentially "vote onto" -> "elect”.

Oh, right, sorry.  Hadn’t checked it off as completed.

Okay.  Thank you, Izumi, for freeing changes.  I’m going to take that as an absolute, and close version 8, and produce new clean and redlines now, and send them to the list.  Expect them in a couple of minutes.  Then I’ll coordinate with Michael to pass the pen and whatever ambiguity remains in the above issues.

I’m just going to be optimistic again, and say that there are NO ADDITIONAL OUTSTANDING ISSUES that are not mentioned in this email.  I hope you can all live with that.

                                -Bill




-------------- 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/20150115/40b470f1/signature.asc>