Important: Please Review Mapping Document by Sunday
Dear task force members, It's important that we make the most of our time together at RIPE 74. With this in mind, we would like to assign you all some homework before our face to face meeting. This will be our main agenda item at the face to face. Please review the accountability mapping document and input values into the Priority and Quality fields for at least the first three boxes (1.0 RIPE Chair to 3.0 Working Groups). To keep this consistent, please use the same rating system - 1-5, with five being highest priority/quality. When you have finished, send this to Antony (agollan@ripe.net) who will collate this in advance of the meeting. This will help us to focus our discussion by identifying where we agree/disagree and ensure we come to the meeting with more specific opinions to share. You can find the latest version of the document here: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/accountability- tf/2017-April/000082.html You'll find that this isn't actually as much reading as it first appears - most of these documents are short and there is a lot of repetition. Please complete this by this Sunday, 7 May. Kind regards Filiz & William
Good Morning fellow TF members,
You can find the latest version of the document here: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/accountability- tf/2017-April/000082.html
thanks to the NCC for keeping this list continuously updated! I had already mentioned during one of the calls that I feel it is important to not only judge based on the formal paper situation (as in: is a process documented?) but also assess the way the processes are "lived" and whether they follow the spirit and/or the letter of a documented process (or one of the 'unwritten ruels'). I stumbled acroos 2.3, suggesting that WG chairs "Announce final best practice documents (or other output) created by WGs". My recollection was that we had always sought an endorsement by the Friday plenary, but that might have been done dfferently over time and across WGs. This leads to a broader question of what the process for RIPE document publication, review, status classification (including obsoletion) is. This might need an addition to section 9. I'd really like the TF to have a closer look at the "WG chair selection process" and the qpplicability of "consensus process" to questions of personnel appointment as well as the PDP, especially the role of the proposer during the PDP (can drop the ball and process restarts), the applicability of the PDP to the PDP, the appropriateness of the WG centric approach for cross WG issues (visibility, transparency, and widest clueful contributuon). Also, the "+1" "consensus building" could benefit from a critical review. Regards, Peter
Sorry for a little delay in response. The earliest mentioning of ENOG i discovered is: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/regional-russia/2011-January/000400.... There is also ENOG PC charter, that should be a public document. Hope, such documents might exist for MENOG/SEE (in relevant lists, could NCC check, please). CU at F2F meeting. Alexander. 2017-05-03 12:51 GMT+02:00, Filiz Yilmaz <koalafil@gmail.com>:
Dear task force members,
It's important that we make the most of our time together at RIPE 74. With this in mind, we would like to assign you all some homework before our face to face meeting. This will be our main agenda item at the face to face.
Please review the accountability mapping document and input values into the Priority and Quality fields for at least the first three boxes (1.0 RIPE Chair to 3.0 Working Groups). To keep this consistent, please use the same rating system - 1-5, with five being highest priority/quality. When you have finished, send this to Antony (agollan@ripe.net) who will collate this in advance of the meeting.
This will help us to focus our discussion by identifying where we agree/disagree and ensure we come to the meeting with more specific opinions to share.
You can find the latest version of the document here: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/accountability- tf/2017-April/000082.html
You'll find that this isn't actually as much reading as it first appears - most of these documents are short and there is a lot of repetition. Please complete this by this Sunday, 7 May.
Kind regards Filiz & William
participants (3)
-
Alexander Isavnin -
Filiz Yilmaz -
Peter Koch