[CRISP-TEAM] Future steps and communicating with RIRs

Andrei Robachevsky robachevsky at isoc.org
Thu Jan 22 18:29:19 CET 2015

Izumi, colleagues,

I agree with your considerations and support Nurani's proposal. My only
question is timing of such communication. I still think that it is
premature to do this before the numbers community proposal is formally
accepted by the ICG.


Izumi Okutani wrote on 22/01/15 18:08:
> Alan, Andrei, Nurani and CRISP Team,
> Many thanks for your input about future steps and whether/how we should
> communicate with RIRs.
> I personally found Nurani's suggestion covers perspectives from both sides.
> I tried to summarize what is needed in regards to future steps and what
> is our role as the CRISP Team.
> In my view, the role of the CRISP Team is to develop the proposal and
> implementation is left to RIRs. Looking at it from this point, I do not
> feel there is a need to inform RIRs as the CRISP Team and it can be left
> to the RIRs.
> At the same time, it is our role to share what are the expected future
> steps clearly to the community. I see some value in informing RIRs to
> give additional visibility to the community that :
>  - We clearly demonstrate in visible form that the CRISP Team have
>    communicated with RIRs, so that RIRs formerly acknowdledges the
>    proposal and proceed with preparations they consider as needed
>  - It is clear to the community, by receiving some respsonse from RIRs,
>    that RIRs have formerly acknowledged the proposal, which require
>    some actions by them, and they will proceed with necessary actions
>    and engage with the community where needed
>    i.e., it would be helpful if RIRs could formally respond and express
>          acknowledgement
> Actually, I think the CRISP Team members do trust the RIRs and I also
> assume this is the same for most of our number resources community
> members, but this may be useful to give assurance and clarity about
> future steps for those who may not be so familiar with RIRs and its
> community, given there are questions on the IANAXFER list.
> In doing so, we should be careful in not making it looks as though the
> CRISP team is in a position to request RIRs of actions, and this is
> simply commnication as a reference, sharing information which may be
> useful to the RIRs.
> I felt Nurani's suggestion meets this adequately in my view.
> So let's see if there are further input until UTC12:00 23rd Jan as I
> suggested in my earlier e-mail. My current suggestion is to take this
> approach suggested by Nurani, in case there are no concerns/other
> comments expressed.
> I continue to welcome to hear your input, and I think it's good that we
> are sharing different perspectives so far, so we consider this well.
> Izumi
> _______________________________________________
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp

More information about the CRISP mailing list