[Iana-ipr] PDF document for review
jrobinson at afilias.info
Fri Mar 18 12:02:57 CET 2016
Alan / Andrew,
Lise & I were seeking to be efficient rather that slow things down. The
concern is that three parallel reviews produce three outcomes which may not
gel together or even contradict one another.
Therefore, it seemed logical to get one (or two as it turns out) reviews
completed prior so that the following one/s build on that rather than
potentially conflict with it.
Trust that makes sense?
From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com]
Sent: 17 March 2016 20:38
To: Lise Fuhr <Fuhr at etno.eu>
Cc: iana-ipr at nro.net
Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] PDF document for review
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:08:17PM +0000, Lise Fuhr wrote:
> I hope you all had a safe travel home. I have discussed the process with
Jonathan regarding the document. We propose to have a sequential review by
our legal counsellors instead of the parallel reviews to avoid any
overlapping work. If any of you have comments already from your advisors it
would be good to share with the group so we can pass on the comments to our
advisors. If you haven't sent them yet, we are happy to be the first to send
to our advisors. Please get back to Jonathan and me if you have any concerns
or questions regarding this procedure.
Like Alan (downthread), I already requested the IETF counsel have a look at
this. So at least two of us are already doing this in parallel :) But
also, I think trying to do this serially will result in a much longer
timeline, and I don't know that we have 6 additional weeks to spare. I'd
like to get this out to the community real soon.
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Iana-ipr mailing list
Iana-ipr at nro.net
More information about the Iana-ipr