[NRO-IANAXFER] What would be helpful when sharing your input

Izumi Okutani izumi at nic.ad.jp
Fri Jan 9 04:44:55 CET 2015


Dear Colleagues,


Thank you for those who have shared your input to the our second draft
proposal already. I very much appreciate your attention to this and to
have provided your comments early. This is helpful for our consideration.

As you are aware, the timeline for the next step in developing the final
proposal to the ICG is very short and we would like to be as effective
as possible in considering your inputs.

For your reference, following are a few points which would be helpful
when sharing your input, for the CRISP Team to understand your position
adequately and effectively during this short period.

 * Do you generally support the concept of each of the proposed
   elements listed in Section III A (1)-(4) (*)
   (While you may have additional inputs about some details)

 * If you are sharing an opinion which are contrary to discussions
   which had been taking place on the <ianaxfer at nro.net> list with no
   further objections expressed or CRISP Team has formed a position,
   do you feel strong enough to reconsider? If so, what are the
   implications you are concerned about in case this point was not
   reconsidered?

 * If you are stating a strong preference to a certain direction of an
   issue, what is the reason? If it is not incorporated, what are the
   consequences you are concerned about?

If you are raising a point, which you don't feel strongly but
raising for the consideration, it would be a helpful reference if you
could clearly state this when making your comment, as several people
have already done on this mailing list.

Expressing support for our proposal is as equally helpful as raising the
points you wish to be considered, which again, as some of you have
already done.

Thank you again for your attention to our proposal, and we continue to
welcome your feedback.



---
(*) Proposed elements listed in Section III
---
   (1) ICANN to continue as the IANA functions operator on number
       resources;
   (2) Intellectual property rights (IPR) related to the provision of
       the IANA services stay with the community;
   (3) Service level agreement with the IANA functions operator on
       number resources; and
   (4) Establishment of a Review Committee, with representatives from
       each RIR, to advise the NRO EC on the review of the IANA
       functions operator’s performance and meeting of identified
       service levels.
---


Best Regards,

Izumi Okutani
The CRISP Team



More information about the ianaxfer mailing list