[IANA-RC] Draft Review Process

George george at apnic.net
Wed Mar 8 00:22:35 CET 2017


Hi Nurani,

A full year report gives a complete view of activities in a year. I 
support this change too.

George

On 7/3/17 2:34 pm, Nurani Nimpuno wrote:
> 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,
> Nurani
>
>
>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> Filiz
>>
>> *
>> *
>>
>> 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
>>     fit.)
>>
>>     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>
>>     https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc
>>     <https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rc mailing list
> Rc at nro.net
> https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc
>



More information about the Rc mailing list