[CRISP-TEAM] Factors for implementaion which affects the timelines

Izumi Okutani izumi at nic.ad.jp
Thu Jun 11 13:04:26 CEST 2015


Hi Andrei, all,


> The NTIA contract also required that ICANN produces a transition plan.
> Perhaps this plan could be a good basis for this work.

I agree this looks like a good starting point.

> But more importantly we (or the RIRs) should make up their mind if this
> fallback mechanism is part of the implementation, or not. In the former
> case the plan should be integrated in the SLA. And for the latter case -
> this item doesn't seem applicable.

This would be a good point to confirm.
I suggest we discuss it at the coming call.

For those you cannot join, I welcome your input online before and until 24 hours after the call.


Izumi


On 2015/06/11 6:45, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Izumi Okutani wrote on 10/06/15 17:19:
> [...]
> 
>>
>> Perhaps it would be the best to leave it the RIR staff beyond this point.
>>
> 
> I agree.
> 
> The NTIA contract also required that ICANN produces a transition plan.
> Perhaps this plan could be a good basis for this work.
> 
> But more importantly we (or the RIRs) should make up their mind if this
> fallback mechanism is part of the implementation, or not. In the former
> case the plan should be integrated in the SLA. And for the latter case -
> this item doesn't seem applicable.
> 
>>
>> Izumi
>>
> 
> Andrei
> 
>>
>> On 2015/06/10 1:11, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
>>> Thank you Izumi,
>>>
>>> Izumi Okutani wrote on 09/06/15 16:40:
>>>> Hi Andrei,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Could you please elaborate what you mean by "fallback mechanism"?
>>>>
>>>> Sure, the idea is in case the RIRs have to switch the IANA Function Operator.
>>>> Basically it is the point Vint Cerf has raised on the ianaxfer list.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Understood.
>>>
>>> Looking at this from a formal point of view isn't this what is in
>>> Article 11 of the SLA "Continuity of operations"? Or do you think this
>>> work will lead to changes in this article, prescribing specific fallback
>>> mechanisms?
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>>> I can think of be two situation:
>>>>
>>>>  1. When RIRs need to switch the IFO as emergency due to serious failure in service level
>>>>     - Need to switch in a short period of time and there is no gurantee the existing IFO will be able to provide the data needed, within the timeframe needed for the switch
>>>>     - Steps need to be defined on how to do this as well as identifying the need for data escrow for non-public data
>>>>
>>>>  2. When RIRs switch the IFO with advanced notice
>>>>     - Likely to have time for preparation but need to define steps
>>>>     - If we are making open RFP, setting the criteria may be another factor in preparing implementation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Izumi
>>>>
>>>> On 2015/06/09 23:29, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
>>>>> Hi Izumi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you please elaborate what you mean by "fallback mechanism"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrei
>>>>>
>>>>> Izumi Okutani wrote on 05/06/15 21:18:
>>>>>>  d. Fallback mechanism
>>>>>>    - Identify elements which needs fallback mechanism
>>>>>>    - Define process
>>>>>>    - Analyse possible impact
>>>>>>    - Identify the need of RFP and if needed draft one
>>>>
>>





More information about the CRISP mailing list