[CRISP-TEAM] Future steps and communicating with RIRs

[Izumi Okutani]

Andrei and CRISP Team,


That is consistent with my initial view as well and personally agree -
but would also like to see if this works for all in the Team.

Since Seun Ojedeji is asking questions about the next steps, I would
like to suggest we reply to the IANAXFER list now, what our plan is i.e.,

 - We communicate with RIR *after* the ICG formally accepts the proposal
 - Clarify that this is intended for communication as reference to the
   RIRs
 - The CRISP Team would like to hear acknowlegement from RIRs about
   this proposal and that there are actions expected on their part, for
   clarity and visibility to the community that RIRs formally
   acknowledge this

If this makes sense, I am happy to draft a response, so all in the team
can see if you are comfortable with the message and the wording.

As for early preparation, I think we can expect CRISP Team members, who
are RIR staff to go back within their respective RIRs and start
preparation needed at this stage.

Hope this makes sense to everyone?


Izumi


On 2015/01/23 2:29, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
> 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.
> 
> Andrei
> 
> 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
>>