[CRISP-TEAM] [NRO-IANAXFER] CRISP Meeting on Thursday September 24th 2015 at 13:00 UTC

Sat Sep 26 20:52:49 CEST 2015

Dear Izumi,
No additional comment
just go ahead for submission to the ICG.
Regards
/Janvier

2015-09-25 23:19 GMT+01:00 Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp>:

> Thanks Andrei, Nurani for your comments.
> I am not hearing any concerns/suggestions for changes from the others, so
> I will submit this to the ICG.
>
> Izumi
>
> On 2015/09/25 22:58, Nurani Nimpuno wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > For the record, I think this draft submission is good. I think it
> accurately reflects what we’ve discussed and what is in our proposal.
> > Nurani
> >
> >> On 25 sep 2015, at 13:19, Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:
> >>
> >> I hear both of you,  Andrei, Mwendwa, that you believe the timing is
> important, hence shouldn't postpone the action items on IPR post-transition.
> >>
> >> This is a summary of my suggestion.
> >>
> >> 1. Submit to ICG, that all IPR issues to be implemented *before* the
> contract expiry
> >>   The current suggested submission to the ICG actually says the IPR
> issue to be addressed before the contract expiry. It does not say anything
> about post-transition.
> >>   (It is my understanding that this is what Andrei and Mwenda supports)
> >>
> >> 2. We continue discussions within the CRISP Team in coming two weeks,
> about timing of implementation of all IPR action items
> >>    - We confirm consensus on this issue at the coming CRISP call on 8th
> Oct
> >>      (Whether all action items need to be completed prior to the
> contract or some can be deferred post-transition)
> >>    - I believe this is needed given we observe different opinions
> >>
> >>
> >> Below is a paste of the draft submission, the same as what I have
> posted in my earlier mail to Andrei :
> https://www.nro.net/pipermail/crisp/2015-September/002264.html
> >>
> >> If you still have concerns about the draft submission to the ICG, I
> genuinely don't understand what it is, as I have intended to address your
> point.
> >> Please suggest a text ASAP.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Izumi
> >>
> >>
> >> ----
> >> Action Items to be submittted to the ICG
> >>
> >> a) Action Item description (and Combined Proposal paragraph reference
> (or other reference?)):
> >>
> >> b) Indicate whether the item needs to be done:
> >>      - before the proposal goes to the NTIA, or
> >>      - during implementation (before contract expiry)
> >>
> >> c) Group/organization responsible for the action item
> >>
> >> d) Indicate dependencies, if any
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> a) Action Item description
> >>
> >> [Action Items from the number community proposal]
> >>
> >> 1. Contract/SLA between RIRs and ICANN
> >>    Based on Section P2.III.A.3. Service Level Agreement with the IANA
> Numbering Services Operator of the combine proposal, develop and finalise
> SLA to be exchanged between RIRs and ICANN, to be signed by both parties.
> >>
> >>    i.   First draft (done)
> >>    ii.  Second draft (done)
> >>    iii. Negotiations (started)
> >>    iv.  Final version
> >>    v.   Signature - ICANN and the five RIRs
> >>
> >> 2. Review Committee for IANA Numbers Functions
> >>   Based on Section P2.III.A.4. Establishment of a Review Committee, set
> up the Review Committee and complete appointment of its members.
> >>
> >>   i.   NRO to finalise charter (done)
> >>   ii.  Each RIR to finalise detailed appointment methods
> >>   iii. Each RIR to appoint members
> >>
> >> 3. IPR
> >>  Based on Section P2.III.A.2. IPR related to the provision of the IANA
> services remains with the community, identify the holder of IPR and
> exchange appropriate agreements by the parties involved.
> >>
> >>   i.   All OCs to agree on the principles for the holder of IPR
> >>   ii.  All OCs to agree on the holder of IPR
> >>   iii. New organisation to be set up, or changes to how IETF Trust
> works, if necessary
> >>   iv.  Agreements between operational communities and IPR holder
> >>   v.   Agreement between IPR holder and IANA functions operator
> >>
> >> 4. Further considerations to support continuation to uphold the NTIA
> criteria in the future (Q.10 from the ICG)
> >>   i. Consider additional actions if needed
> >>
> >> [Action Items from other operational communities' proposal]
> >> 5. PTI
> >>   i. Ensure PTI to be established is consistent with the number
> community has agreed to the names proposal
> >>
> >>
> >> b) Timing for the actions to be completed
> >>   All actions are to be done during implementation (before contract
> expiry) except:
> >>   - Action item 4. needs to be completed before the proposal goes to
> the NTIA
> >>
> >> c) Group/organization responsible for the action items
> >>  -  RIRs are responsible for preparing implemenation for all items
> >>  - The CRISP Team is responsible for ensuring the implementation is
> consistent with the number community proposal
> >>  - The CRISP Team coordinates with RIRs on IPR for "All OCs to agree on
> the holder of IPR"
> >>
> >>
> >> d) Indicate dependencies, if any
> >>  - Action items listed in 3. IPR require coordination with the protocol
> parameters and the names communities.
> >>
> >> ----
> >>
> >> On 2015/09/25 19:42, Mwendwa Kivuva wrote:
> >>> I'm with you here Andrei
> >>> On Sep 25, 2015 1:26 PM, "Andrei Robachevsky" <robachevsky at isoc.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Izumi Okutani wrote on 25/09/15 09:33:
> >>>>> Let me know if anyone has concerns about this approach.
> >>>>
> >>>> Izumi, as I explained in my previous mail, I am concerned that
> deferring
> >>>> a decision on this issue undermines the numbers proposal.
> >>>>
> >>>> The communities have come very close to the agreement as far as I
> >>>> understand. Taking our foot off the accelerator now would mean that we
> >>>> either will have to start over again, or, most probably, not resolve
> the
> >>>> issue at all.
> >>>>
> >>>> The problem is that possible negative consequences of such situation
> >>>> will appear only when (and if) the numbers community decide to change
> >>>> the IFO, not immediately. That means that after the transition there
> >>>> will be very little appetite to resolve it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Andrei
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> CRISP mailing list
> >>>> CRISP at nro.net
> >>>> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CRISP mailing list
> >> CRISP at nro.net
> >> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/crisp/attachments/20150926/ad50a9cf/attachment.html>