[IANA-RC] Draft Review Process
madhvi at afrinic.net
Tue Mar 7 14:30:35 CET 2017
I agree with Filiz's proposal. Workable for AFRINIC.
On 07/03/2017 4:26 PM, Nate Davis wrote:
> Yes – this is workable for ARIN.
> From: <rc-bounces at nro.net <mailto:rc-bounces at nro.net>> on behalf of
> Nurani Nimpuno <nurani at nimblebits.net <mailto:nurani at nimblebits.net>>
> Date: Tuesday, March 7, 2017 at 3:04 AM
> To: Filiz Yilmaz <koalafil at gmail.com <mailto:koalafil at gmail.com>>
> Cc: "rc at nro.net <mailto:rc at nro.net>" <rc at nro.net <mailto:rc at nro.net>>
> Subject: Re: [IANA-RC] Draft Review Process
> Hi Filiz,
> Hm, that is a very good, practical point. Full calendar years makes
> much more sense of course. It should be rather easy for the RIRs to
> summarise the year in January and then for the community and us to
> review it in February.
> I support this change.
> RIR staff - does this seem workable to you too?
> Kind regards,
>> On 6 Mar 2017, at 11:15, Filiz Yilmaz <koalafil at gmail.com
>> <mailto:koalafil at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Hi Nurani,
>> Thanks for putting this together. I like it, concise, to the point
>> and easy to read.
>> I just have one comment and suggestion for a change:
>> Instead of September I propose:
>> "The RIRs will publish an IANA numbering services review matrix in
>> *January* of *every calendar year*, summarising the RIR’s review of
>> the performance of the IANA numbering services*in the previous
>> calendar year..."*
>> This way RIRs can report on a full calendar year and then we can
>> review that in say February.
>> So first report will come to us from RIRs in 2018 January, covering
>> practices and performance of IANA in the entire 2017.
>> Then we review it in Feb and publish our review.
>> Then in 2019 Jan, RIRs send their report to us in Jan about the
>> practices seen in 2018, etc etc...
>> This will make things much easier in my opinion, both managing
>> deadlines, doing the work and then reporting what is done publicly too.
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Nurani Nimpuno <nurani at nimblebits.net
>> <mailto:nurani at nimblebits.net>> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> In an attempt to move forward on defining scope and processes for
>> this group, I have drafted a proposed Review Process below. I
>> believe this reflects the intention of the CRISP proposal.
>> Given that there are only ~3 requests per year in total for all
>> RIRs, and that we have a history of 20+ years of stable services
>> that the RIRs have been satisfied with, I believe it does not
>> have to be more complicated than this.
>> Happy to discuss any details of this. (The timing, such as
>> September every year, and 30 days comment period, are merely
>> suggestions. Feel free to suggest adjustments to these as you see
>> Kind regards,
>> Nurani Nimpuno
>> Review Process
>> The RIRs will publish an IANA numbering services review matrix in
>> September every year, summarising the RIR’s review of the
>> performance of the IANA numbering services in the last year. This
>> review matrix gets submitted to the Review Committee who passes
>> it on to the five respective RIR communities for a public comment
>> period of 30 days. The Review Committee gathers input and
>> comments from the five RIR communities, which it reviews and
>> summarises. The Review Committee compiles a final report on the
>> review matrix, with the summarised input appended, which it
>> publishes and submits to the NRO EC as advice.
>> Rc mailing list
>> Rc at nro.net <mailto:Rc at nro.net>
> Rc mailing list
> Rc at nro.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Rc