- cooperation-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Fwd: [CRISP-TEAM] CRISP team Meeting : Mon 18th May
by Nurani Nimpuno 18 May '15

18 May '15

My very sincere apologies for this last minute forward. Nurani > Begin forwarded message: > > From: German Valdez <german(a)nro.net> > Date: 13 maj 2015 19:56:45 CEST > To: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > Cc: "crisp(a)nro.net" <crisp(a)nro.net> > Subject: Re: [CRISP-TEAM] CRISP team Meeting : Mon 18th May > > Hi > > PLease find below webex details. > > Apologies in advance I won’t attend this meeting as I’ll be in transit to MAG meeting. LACNIC staff will provide the secretariat support during this call/ > > German > > > > >> On 14 May 2015, at 3:05 am, Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp <mailto:izumi@nic.ad.jp>> wrote: >> >> CRISP Team, >> >> >> Outside our regular call schedule, I would like to suggest having a CRISP Team call on 18th May UTC13:00. >> >> Apologies for a very short notice and for not providing other candidates. >> Nurani and I believe we need to discuss the comments we will be submitting from the CRISP Team to the names proposal before their close of the public comments on 20th May. >> >> Michael and John have very helpfully has worked on the comprehensive and comparative analysis for the names and our proposal, so once this is shared, I encourage you all to share your feedback on the mailing list before the call. >> To submit the comments two days after our call, we need to indentify the issues to raise as the numbers community online as much as possible before the call. >> >> >> Hi German, >> >> Would appreciate it if you could help us send the webex invitation to the global inaxfer(a)nro.net <mailto:inaxfer@nro.net> list. >> >> >> Thanks, >> Izumi >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CRISP mailing list >> CRISP(a)nro.net <mailto:CRISP@nro.net> >> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp > > > You can forward this invitation to others. > Hello, > German Valdez invites you to join this WebEx meeting. > > CRISP Meeting May 18th > Monday, May 18, 2015 > 1:00 pm | UTC | 1 hr > > Join WebEx meeting <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=mc730f2d38c9ddd7976a50091e34b5…> > Meeting number: 702 200 705 > Meeting password: crisp > > Join by phone > 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) > +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) > Access code: 702 200 705 > Global call-in numbers <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=390113…> | Toll-free calling restrictions <http://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf> > > > _______________________________________________ > CRISP mailing list > CRISP(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp

1 0

Re: [cooperation-wg] cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 40, Issue 5
by Salam Yamout 17 May '15

17 May '15

Dear Athina Thank you for below. The CCWG draft is indeed complicated and you have revealed the questions of interest. So here are my opinions: 1- Revised Mission - It is OK to refer to the ASO MOU between ICANN and RIRs as long as it does not contradict the CRISP proposal principles and the new (to be) SLA agreement. Are we sure that the old ASO MOU between ICANN and RIRs will be valid in the future after the IANA transition? 2- I agree with the removal of the notion "private sector led multistakeholder” 3- US Headquarters. I do not agree with the ASO representatives approach that the notion of US Headquarters is an administrative issue which would not be considered as fundamental. This is because we need the assurance of law enforcement in case of disputes or problems. So the definition of the of the governing law is fundamental to the enactment of the policy. We all know that what can be right in one country can be wrong in another country so we need to know which law is part of our accountability process. 4- Appeal MEchanisms. I agree with ASO representatives that any appeal mechanism developed by the CCWG should not cover disputes relating to Internet number resources. 5- Powers. I do have comments on the new suggested structure. a- How can the IRP be independent and selected and compensated by ICANN? Question: If ICANN is turned into a member based organization, will it always have 29 members divided between SOs/ACs as described in the CCWG proposal? Best Salam Yamout On May 16, 2015, at 1:00 PM, cooperation-wg-request(a)ripe.net wrote: > Send cooperation-wg mailing list submissions to > cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > cooperation-wg-request(a)ripe.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > cooperation-wg-owner(a)ripe.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of cooperation-wg digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. CCWG Report - Issues of interest to the numbers community > (Athina Fragkouli) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 16:15:01 +0200 > From: Athina Fragkouli <athina.fragkouli(a)ripe.net> > To: cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: [cooperation-wg] CCWG Report - Issues of interest to the > numbers community > Message-ID: <5555FF65.2000405(a)ripe.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Dear colleagues, > > The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability > (CCWG) has published a Draft Report that contains its initial Draft > Proposal. The Draft Report can be found here: > > CCWG-Accountability Draft Report (without annexes): > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-propos… > [PDF, 1.72 MB] > > CCWG-Accountability Draft Report (with annexes): > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-propos… > [PDF, 2.05 MB] > > The ASO representatives to the CCWG encourage the numbers community to > review and give feedback on any specific points in the Draft Report, and > reply to the questions listed in the document. > > At the same time we would like to draw the numbers community?s attention > to the following matters, as we believe that they are of interest to the > numbers community and we would appreciate the community's feedback: > > 1. Revised Mission > > The CCWG suggests clarifications on the description of ICANN?s mission > (more details in section 3.1 of the Draft Report). During the drafting > process the ASO representatives provided a tentative description of > ICANN?s mission in regard to the coordination of policy development for > Internet number resources (page 20, paragraph 57). The tentative > description reads as follows: > > ?In this role, with respect to IP addresses and AS numbers, ICANN?s > Mission is described in the ASO MoU between ICANN and RIRs.? > > Do you feel that this description is accurate? > > 2. Revised Commitments and Core Values > > The CCWG proposes an amendment to one of the core values of the Bylaws > (page 25, paragraph 89). The proposed amendment reads as follows: > > ?Employ open, transparent and bottom-up, [private sector led > multistakeholder] policy development processes that (i) seeks input from > the public, for whose benefit ICANN shall in all events act, (ii) > promote well- informed decisions based on expert advice, and (iii) > ensure that those entities most affected can assist in the policy > development process;? > > Given that the RIR global policies are described as open, transparent > and bottom-up, the ASO representatives have a concern on the inclusion > of the notion of ?private sector led multistakeholder?, which is put in > square brackets. The addition of this notion may lead to uncertainty on > whether ICANN?s core values include the employment of RIR global policies. > > Do you agree with the removal of the notion ?private sector led > multistakeholder?? > > 3. US Headquarters as part of the Fundamental Bylaws > > The CCWG incorporated some provisions from the Affirmation of > Commitments relevant to ICANN accountability into the Bylaws (in > particular regarding ICANN?s Mission and Core Values). The CCWG has > suggested defining these provisions as "Fundamental Bylaws". The concept > of Fundamental Bylaws is described in section 3.2 (pp 27-31) of the > Draft Report. The main difference with the common Bylaws provisions is > that while the Board could propose a change to this Bylaws provision, > SO/ACs could block the proposed change (by a 75% vote). On the other > hand any change to Fundamental Bylaws would require approval by SO/ACs > (75% vote). > > One of these provisions requires that ICANN ?remains headquartered in > the United States of America?. The CCWG noted that this provision exists > already in current ICANN Bylaws, at Article XVIII Section 1: ?OFFICES. > The principal office for the transaction of the business of ICANN shall > be in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, United States of > America. ICANN may also have an additional office or offices within or > outside the United States of America as it may from time to time establish.? > > As the rest of Affirmation of Commitments provisions are suggested to be > incorporated in the Fundamental Bylaws, the CCWG considered whether this > provision should also be listed as a Fundamental Bylaw. The comment by > the ASO Representatives was that while the rest of the Affirmation of > Commitments provisions incorporated can indeed be seen as fundamental > principles, the notion of US Headquarters is an administrative issue, > which would not be considered as fundamental. > > Do you agree with the ASO representatives approach? > > 4. Appealing Mechanisms > > The CCWG has proposed enhancements to the two appealing mechanisms > described in ICANN Bylaws, i.e. the Independent Review Panel and the > Reconsideration process. The ASO representatives commented that, even > though the ICANN Board approves its global policies, the processes and > forums for bottom-up policy development relating to number resources is > outside of ICANN, and there are separate appealing procedures for > disputes relating to Internet number resources. In particular there is: > 1. an arbitration process described in the ASO MoU for disputes relevant > to the Global Policy development process > 2. an arbitration process described in the draft Service Level Agreement > between the five RIRs and IANA Numbering Services Operator for disputes > relevant to the IANA numbering services. > 3. A bottom-up process for any concerns that a third party may have > relating to Internet number resources issues. > > Additionally the ASO representatives noted that it was requested by the > CWG that decisions regarding ccTLD delegations or revocations would be > excluded from standing, until relevant appeal mechanisms have been > developed by the ccTLD community, in coordination with other parties. > > Considering the above, the ASO representatives would propose that any > appeal mechanism developed by the CCWG should not cover disputes > relating to Internet number resources. > > 5. Powers > > The CCWG suggested that the following powers would ensure community > empowerment: > > Reconsider/reject budget or strategy/operating plans (section 5.2 of the > Draft Report, pp 47-48) - We would like to note that this power was > listed as one of the expected accountability mechanisms by the CWG. > - Reconsider/reject changes to ICANN Standard Bylaws (section 5.3 of the > Draft Report pp 48-49) > - Approve changes to Fundamental Bylaws (section 5.4 of the Draft Report > pp 49-50) > - Remove individual ICANN Directors (section 5.5 of the Draft Report pp > 50-52) > - Recall the entire ICANN Board (section 5.6 of the Draft Report pp 52- 53) > > These powers would be exercised by changing ICANN?s structure into a > membership-based organisation, of which the SO/ACs would be the members. > Details of this structure can be found in section 5.1.1 of the proposal > (pp 42-45). > > Do you have any concerns or comments on any of these powers or the > suggested structure? > > Thank you, > > Athina Fragkouli > ASO representative to the CCWG-Accountability > > > > > End of cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 40, Issue 5 > *********************************************

1 0

CCWG Report - Issues of interest to the numbers community
by Athina Fragkouli 15 May '15

15 May '15

Dear colleagues, The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG) has published a Draft Report that contains its initial Draft Proposal. The Draft Report can be found here: CCWG-Accountability Draft Report (without annexes): https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-propos… [PDF, 1.72 MB] CCWG-Accountability Draft Report (with annexes): https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-propos… [PDF, 2.05 MB] The ASO representatives to the CCWG encourage the numbers community to review and give feedback on any specific points in the Draft Report, and reply to the questions listed in the document. At the same time we would like to draw the numbers community’s attention to the following matters, as we believe that they are of interest to the numbers community and we would appreciate the community's feedback: 1. Revised Mission The CCWG suggests clarifications on the description of ICANN’s mission (more details in section 3.1 of the Draft Report). During the drafting process the ASO representatives provided a tentative description of ICANN’s mission in regard to the coordination of policy development for Internet number resources (page 20, paragraph 57). The tentative description reads as follows: “In this role, with respect to IP addresses and AS numbers, ICANN’s Mission is described in the ASO MoU between ICANN and RIRs.” Do you feel that this description is accurate? 2. Revised Commitments and Core Values The CCWG proposes an amendment to one of the core values of the Bylaws (page 25, paragraph 89). The proposed amendment reads as follows: “Employ open, transparent and bottom-up, [private sector led multistakeholder] policy development processes that (i) seeks input from the public, for whose benefit ICANN shall in all events act, (ii) promote well- informed decisions based on expert advice, and (iii) ensure that those entities most affected can assist in the policy development process;” Given that the RIR global policies are described as open, transparent and bottom-up, the ASO representatives have a concern on the inclusion of the notion of “private sector led multistakeholder”, which is put in square brackets. The addition of this notion may lead to uncertainty on whether ICANN’s core values include the employment of RIR global policies. Do you agree with the removal of the notion “private sector led multistakeholder”? 3. US Headquarters as part of the Fundamental Bylaws The CCWG incorporated some provisions from the Affirmation of Commitments relevant to ICANN accountability into the Bylaws (in particular regarding ICANN’s Mission and Core Values). The CCWG has suggested defining these provisions as "Fundamental Bylaws". The concept of Fundamental Bylaws is described in section 3.2 (pp 27-31) of the Draft Report. The main difference with the common Bylaws provisions is that while the Board could propose a change to this Bylaws provision, SO/ACs could block the proposed change (by a 75% vote). On the other hand any change to Fundamental Bylaws would require approval by SO/ACs (75% vote). One of these provisions requires that ICANN “remains headquartered in the United States of America”. The CCWG noted that this provision exists already in current ICANN Bylaws, at Article XVIII Section 1: “OFFICES. The principal office for the transaction of the business of ICANN shall be in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, United States of America. ICANN may also have an additional office or offices within or outside the United States of America as it may from time to time establish.” As the rest of Affirmation of Commitments provisions are suggested to be incorporated in the Fundamental Bylaws, the CCWG considered whether this provision should also be listed as a Fundamental Bylaw. The comment by the ASO Representatives was that while the rest of the Affirmation of Commitments provisions incorporated can indeed be seen as fundamental principles, the notion of US Headquarters is an administrative issue, which would not be considered as fundamental. Do you agree with the ASO representatives approach? 4. Appealing Mechanisms The CCWG has proposed enhancements to the two appealing mechanisms described in ICANN Bylaws, i.e. the Independent Review Panel and the Reconsideration process. The ASO representatives commented that, even though the ICANN Board approves its global policies, the processes and forums for bottom-up policy development relating to number resources is outside of ICANN, and there are separate appealing procedures for disputes relating to Internet number resources. In particular there is: 1. an arbitration process described in the ASO MoU for disputes relevant to the Global Policy development process 2. an arbitration process described in the draft Service Level Agreement between the five RIRs and IANA Numbering Services Operator for disputes relevant to the IANA numbering services. 3. A bottom-up process for any concerns that a third party may have relating to Internet number resources issues. Additionally the ASO representatives noted that it was requested by the CWG that decisions regarding ccTLD delegations or revocations would be excluded from standing, until relevant appeal mechanisms have been developed by the ccTLD community, in coordination with other parties. Considering the above, the ASO representatives would propose that any appeal mechanism developed by the CCWG should not cover disputes relating to Internet number resources. 5. Powers The CCWG suggested that the following powers would ensure community empowerment: Reconsider/reject budget or strategy/operating plans (section 5.2 of the Draft Report, pp 47-48) - We would like to note that this power was listed as one of the expected accountability mechanisms by the CWG. - Reconsider/reject changes to ICANN Standard Bylaws (section 5.3 of the Draft Report pp 48-49) - Approve changes to Fundamental Bylaws (section 5.4 of the Draft Report pp 49-50) - Remove individual ICANN Directors (section 5.5 of the Draft Report pp 50-52) - Recall the entire ICANN Board (section 5.6 of the Draft Report pp 52- 53) These powers would be exercised by changing ICANN’s structure into a membership-based organisation, of which the SO/ACs would be the members. Details of this structure can be found in section 5.1.1 of the proposal (pp 42-45). Do you have any concerns or comments on any of these powers or the suggested structure? Thank you, Athina Fragkouli ASO representative to the CCWG-Accountability

1 0

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: [NRO secretariat] [CRISP-TEAM] CRISP Team 19th Meeting May 7th 1:00 PM UTC 2015
by Andrei Robachevsky 07 May '15

07 May '15

FYI, Andrei Robachevsky -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: [NRO secretariat] [CRISP-TEAM] CRISP Team 19th Meeting May 7th 1:00 PM UTC 2015 Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 19:39:41 +1000 From: German Valdez <german(a)nro.net> To: ianaxfer(a)nro.net Sorry for last minute notification. Agenda and Webex details for CRISP Team 19th meeting. Regards German > Begin forwarded message: > > *From: *Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp <mailto:izumi@nic.ad.jp>> > *Subject: **Re: [NRO secretariat] [CRISP-TEAM] CRISP Team 19th Meeting > May 7th 1:00 2015 PM UTC* > *Date: *6 May 2015 12:03:16 pm AEST > *To: *<crisp(a)nro.net <mailto:crisp@nro.net>>, "secretariat(a)nro.net > <mailto:secretariat@nro.net> Secretariat" <secretariat(a)nro.net > <mailto:secretariat@nro.net>> > > Thanks German. > > Would you help us share this invitation to the ianaxfer(a)nro.net > <mailto:ianaxfer@nro.net> list as well, if this it not yet shared? > > > CRISP Team, > > Please share this to your regional lists. > I also welcome your feedback on the draft agenda below. > > > ---- > Draft Agenda: > > 1. Agenda Review > > 2. Action Items > a. Minutes from the last call > b. Fix regular Meeting Schedule > c. Arrange a call with CWG-Stewardship Chairs > d. Follow up from the GAO Interview > > 3. Confirm the current status > a. Preparing implementation by RIRs > b. Feedback from Global list > c. Feedback RIR regional lists + Preparation for RIPE70 > d. Feedback from other communities > > 4. Reconfirm the role of the CRISP Team in community consultation on > implementation > > 5. Update on the meeting with CWG-Stewardship Chairs > a. Key points relevant to the numbers > b. Next steps > > 6. Next Meeting > > 7. AOB > ---- > > > Izumi > > On 2015/05/01 19:59, German Valdez wrote: >> You can forward this invitation to others. >> >> Hello, >> German Valdez invites you to join this WebEx meeting. >> >> *CRISP Team 19th Meeting* >> Thursday, May 7, 2015 >> 1:00 pm | UTC | 1 hr >> >> *Join WebEx meeting* >> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m576475b86b33f866cfe001f369705…> >> >> Meeting number:701 321 579 >> Meeting password:crisp >> >> *Join by phone* >> *0800-051-3810* Call-in toll-free number (UK) >> *+44-203-478-5289* Call-in toll number (UK) >> Access code: 701 321 579 >> Global call-in numbers >> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=387582…> >> | >> Toll-free calling restrictions >> <http://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf> >> >> Add this meeting >> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=me60890866556c087255f2194811e4…> >> to >> your calendar. >> >> Can't join the meeting? Contact support. >> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/mc> >> >> IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please note that this WebEx service allows audio >> and other >> information sent during the session to be recorded, which may be >> discoverable in >> a legal matter. By joining this session, you automatically consent to >> such >> recordings. If you do not consent to being recorded, discuss your >> concerns with >> the host or do not join the session. >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CRISP mailing list >> CRISP(a)nro.net <mailto:CRISP@nro.net> >> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp >> > >

1 0

CCWG-Accountability Publishes Draft Report
by Athina Fragkouli 06 May '15

06 May '15

Dear colleagues, The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) has published a Draft Report that contains its initial Draft Proposal. The Draft Report can be found here: CCWG-Accountability Draft Report (without annexes): https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-propos… [PDF, 1.72 MB] CCWG-Accountability Draft Report (with annexes): https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-propos… [PDF, 2.05 MB] This initial Draft Proposal is focused on draft Work Stream 1 recommendations. Work Stream 1 relates to those changes to ICANN’s accountability arrangements that must be in place, or committed to, prior to the IANA stewardship transition. More information can be found here: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-20… The CCWG-Accountability is seeking public comments until 3 June, 23:59 UTC. For the better understanding of the CCWG-Accountability work, you are invited to join a webinar that will provide an overview of their work and answer any questions you may have. Two webinars will held at different times to facilitate participation across time zones (the content of these webinars will be identical): 11 May from UTC 11:00 – 12:30 11 May from UTC 19:00 – 20:30 For further details please see: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53773485 An analysis on specific issues that may affect the numbering community will be available shortly. Thank you, Athina Fragkouli ASO representative to the CCWG-Accountability

1 0

IANA Stewardship Transition at RIPE 70
by Paul Rendek 05 May '15

05 May '15

Dear colleagues, RIPE 70 is approaching next week, and the IANA stewardship transition will once again be an important issue for discussion and consideration by the community. Unlike previous RIPE Meetings, discussion of IANA stewardship will be held in the plenary session to take place on Tuesday, 12 May, from 16:00-18:00 CEST. This presentation will be delivered by the RIPE CRISP team members; Nurani Nimpuno, Andrei Robachevsky and RIPE NCC staff representative Paul Rendek, and RIPE NCC Legal Counsel, Athina Fragkouli. The presentation will take the following format, allowing time for community discussion and feedback: 1. Update on the CRISP process to date and the Internet numbers community proposal on IANA stewardship 2. Presentation of the draft Service Level Agreement prepared by RIR legal staff 3. Update on developments in other IANA-affected community (names, protocol parameters), discussion of concerns and expectations in moving towards a single IANA stewardship proposal As background to this discussion, the following documents are available for you to read: Internet Numbers Community IANA Stewardship Proposal: https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/NRODiscussionList_20150116.pdf Draft Service Level Agreement for IANA Numbering Services: https://www.nro.net/news/call-for-comments-for-a-draft-sla-for-the-iana-num… CRISP team information and archive material: https://www.nro.net/crisp-team Background information on IANA stewardship transition: https://ripe.net/iana-stewardship-transition RIPE 70 will also include an update on the work of the ICANN Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) on Enhancing ICANN Accountability by Athina Fragkouli, who serves as an Address Supporting Organisation representative on the group. This update will take place during the plenary session on Friday, 15 May, from 9:00-10:30 CEST. All RIPE CRISP team members will be on-site at the RIPE Meeting throughout next week, and we look forward to speaking with meeting attendees about the IANA stewardship transition issues. Best regards, Paul Rendek Director of External Relations RIPE NCC on behalf of the RIPE CRISP Team

1 0

Call for Comments for a Draft SLA for the IANA Numbering Services
by Nick Hyrka 01 May '15

01 May '15

Dear colleagues, There is a call for comments for a draft Service Level Agreement (SLA) for the IANA Numbering Services. Please find more information on the NRO website here: https://www.nro.net/news/call-for-comments-for-a-draft-sla-for-the-iana-num… The call for comments will remain open until 14 June 2015 at 23:59 (UTC). Kind regards Nick Hyrka Communications Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] 2nd Draft of IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions published
by Nurani Nimpuno 28 Apr '15

28 Apr '15

FYI. Kind regards, Nurani > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Nurani Nimpuno <nurani(a)netnod.se> > Date: 28 april 2015 21:41:28 CEST > To: ianaxfer(a)nro.net > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] 2nd Draft of IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions published > > Dear colleagues, > > We would like to draw your attention to the 2nd Draft Proposal of the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions, which has now been published: > > https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-2015-0… > > On this page, you will find the full proposal, the Chairs' Foreword summarising the proposal, instructions on how to provide feedback on the proposal, and a Public Comment Input Template. The comment period for this draft proposal is open until 20 May 2015. > > We would like to encourage anyone interested in the Names Community's proposal to read it and to provide feedback within the comment period. > > The CRISP team has started the work of conducting an analysis of the Names Community's proposal to identify any issues that may affect the Numbers Community. We hope to share this analysis with the community, once completed. > > As you are awre, the CRISP chairs have also contacted the chairs of the Names Community, requesting them to communicate any issues they identify in their proposal that might affect the Numbers Community, before the final submission to the ICG. (See the forwarded mail below.) > > We are scheduling a teleconference with the chairs of the Names Community to discuss this. > > Kind regards, > > Izumi Okutani, CRISP chair > Nurani Nimpuno, CRISP vice chair > > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> Date: 24 mars 2015 09:37:35 CET >> From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> >> To: "ianaxfer(a)nro.net" <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> >> Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: Request for Communication with CWG-Stewardship on Naming Related Functions >> >> FYI, based on discussions within the CRISP Team, I have made this request to CWG-Names chairs so we would be informed of any dicussions in the CWG-Names which affects the numbers community. >> Still waiting for their response. >> >> Regards, >> Izumi >> >> >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> Subject: Request for Communication with CWG-Stewardship on Naming Related Functions >> Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 13:57:55 +0900 >> From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> >> To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson(a)afilias.info>, Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr(a)difo.dk> >> CC: Alan Barrett <apb(a)cequrux.com> >> >> Dear Jonathan and Lise, >> >> >> I am writing to you as Chair of the Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship Proposal (CRISP) team, responsible for preparation of the numbers community's response to the ICG's Request for Proposals. >> >> It was helpful to have the update on the CWG for Naming Related Functions progress at the session in Singapore, including the revised timeline of the process proposed by the CWG-Names, with a CWG-Names proposal submission in June later this year. This revised timeline increases the need for collaborative and constructive work in the ICG as well as between all three stakeholder communities to progress efficiently with the timeline. We remain positive that a proposal satisfactory to all parties, can be produced through this process. >> >> The ICG's decision to seek proposals from the three separate affected communities reflects the distinct needs, mechanisms and historical development of these three communities. At the same time, developing a proposal that satisfactorily addresses stewardship of all the IANA functions is a priority for all parties. >> >> With this in mind, I would like to request that the Chairs of the CWG-Names communicate directly to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the CRISP team, regarding any proposals or developments that might affect the numbers community in advance, and not wait for the final submission to the ICG. >> >> This level of direct communication and collaboration will allow all communities to consider the impact and potential compatibility issues among the proposals ahead of the ICG consolidation process, consult appropriately within their communities, and, if necessary, develop appropriate responses efficiently, rather than wait for inputs from the numbers community after the ICG consolidates proposal from all the operational communities. Such bottom-up consideration by all communities will be essential to the authority and success of any final proposal to the NTIA. >> >> I look forward to hearing of your continued progress, and to work collaboratively with you to achieve a successful outcome for all, of the IANA Stewardship transition. >> >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Izumi Okutani, Alan Barrett >> CRISP Team Chair, Vice-Chair >> ___________________ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ianaxfer mailing list >> ianaxfer(a)nro.net >> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer > > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

1 0

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] Agenda and Webex info for CRISP Team 18th Meeting April 23rd 2015 13:00 UTC
by Nurani Nimpuno 23 Apr '15

23 Apr '15

fyi. Nurani Nimpuno > Begin forwarded message: > > From: German Valdez <german(a)nro.net> > Date: 23 april 2015 06:44:57 CEST > To: <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Agenda and Webex info for CRISP Team 18th Meeting April 23rd 2015 13:00 UTC > > Hi > > Please find below, agenda and webex information for CRISP Team meeting to be held on Friday April 23rd at 13:00 UTC > > --- > 1. Agenda Review > > 2. Update on the CRISP Team Composition > a. Welcome new member: Janvier Ngnoulayea > > 3. Action Items > a. Minutes from the last call > b. Share future steps with the community > c. Confirm about IPR and the IETF Trust with the IETF > d. Arrange a call with CWG-Stewardship Chairs > e. Doodle poll on future call schedule (have some regularity) > > 4. Confirm community feedback > a. ARIN35 > b. Other RIR regions > c. Global list > > 5. Update on GAO interview > > 6. Update on the call with NRO EC > a. Overview: What was confirmed, follow up items > b. The role (if any) of the CRISP Team in community consultation > c. The role (if any) of the CRISP Team in NRO website of discussions at RIR meetings > > 7. Preparation for ICANN Board panel > a. Jurisdiction > b. Country of the IANA function operator > c. Implications for delay in submission of the proposal > d. Ability for RIR community to chose the IANA operator > e. IPR > f. Gap between traditional negitiations and open community process > > 8. Next Meeting > > 9. AOB > > === > >> >> >> CRISP Team 18th Meeting >> Thursday, April 23, 2015 >> 1:00 pm | UTC | 1 hr >> >> Join WebEx meeting <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m4067a2dd09675ad7f7ae25a317a69…> >> Meeting number: 704 615 073 >> Meeting password: crisp >> >> Join by phone >> 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) >> +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) >> Access code: 704 615 073 >> Global call-in numbers <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=383953…> | Toll-free calling restrictions <http://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf> >> >> >> Regards >> >> German Valdez >> > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

1 0

RIPE NCC Report on the GCCS 2015
by Chris Buckridge 21 Apr '15

21 Apr '15

Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC has published a report on our participation in the Global Conference on Cyberspace (GCCS) 2015 that was held in The Hague on 16-17 April: https://www.ripe.net/reports/gccs2015 Best regards, Chris Buckridge Senior External Relations Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Report on 2015 Russian IGF
by Maxim Burtikov 17 Apr '15

17 Apr '15

Dear colleagues, The sixth annual Russian Internet Governance Forum (IGF) was held on 7 April 2015 in Moscow, Russia. The meeting attracted over 500 participants and focused on Internet governance and regulation, as well as the technical, political and economic aspects of ICT development. In the opening plenary, concerns were raised about the stability and resiliency of the Russian Internet (Runet). Representatives from the Russian Telecommunications Ministry and the Russian Parliament joined a number of attendees expressing concern at the case of registrars closing the accounts of Crimean domain holders following sanctions by the United States. Several speakers described this as a dangerous precedent and a serious problem for global Internet governance, with several noting that the Internet by its nature should be trans-border. The Internet of Things (IoT) was a major topic of discussion, and seen by many participants as an inevitable development, though still some way off. IPv6 was recognised as necessary for the IoT and the role of the RIPE NCC and other Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) in helping to facilitate this was acknowledged. Privacy and security issues associated with IoT were also a cause for concern, with many feeling that they were not yet being addressed. The meeting included discussions on the importance of dialogue between industry and government. The main message from the Ministry was that the Russian Government was actively seeking industry’s feedback and provided multiple channels for this. Some speakers made the contentious observation that there has been a lack of engagement on the side of industry, and while others disagreed with that observation, all parties agreed that effective dialogue was vital. Kaveh Ranjbar, RIPE NCC Chief Information Officer, participated in a panel session entitled “We Share the Same Technology Regardless of Ideology”. This was a broad discussion on security, technology and standards – primarily within the context of the IoT – with a focus on the importance of stable, accepted standards in facilitating Internet growth. More information, including video archives, is available on the Russian IGF website <http://rigf.ru/en/>. Best, Maxim RIPE NCC

1 0

Upcoming Digital Rights Europe Conference #DRE2015
by Niall O'Reilly 16 Apr '15

16 Apr '15

Hello, Coop-WGers. In case this isn't already on your radar, it looks like a really interesting conference: https://www.digitalrights.ie/speakers/ Best regards, Niall O'Reilly

2 1

Re: [cooperation-wg] cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4
by Salam Yamout 13 Apr '15

13 Apr '15

Congratulations Nurani! On Apr 10, 2015, at 1:00 PM, cooperation-wg-request(a)ripe.net wrote: > Send cooperation-wg mailing list submissions to > cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > cooperation-wg-request(a)ripe.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > cooperation-wg-owner(a)ripe.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of cooperation-wg digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] Announcement of the new CRISP Team Vice > Chair (Nurani Nimpuno) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 07:53:15 +0200 > From: Nurani Nimpuno <nurani(a)netnod.se> > To: RIPE Cooperation Working Group <cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net> > Subject: [cooperation-wg] Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] Announcement of the new > CRISP Team Vice Chair > Message-ID: <FA6A4DD8-536B-4C4C-BB0D-B3875D34A3EA(a)netnod.se> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > FYI. > > Nurani Nimpuno > on behalf of the RIPE CRISP Team > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> Date: 10 april 2015 05:30:48 CEST >> From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> >> To: "ianaxfer(a)nro.net" <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> >> Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Announcement of the new CRISP Team Vice Chair >> >> Dear Colleagues, >> >> >> I am pleased to announce that Nurani Nimpuno has been elected as the new Vice Chair of the CRISP Team. >> Based on the election was conducted at the 17th CRISP Team call on 8th April, she has replaced Alan Barrett who has been serving as the Vice Chair. >> >> Following his appointment as the CEO of AFRINIC, Alan Barrett will be resigning from the CRISP Team after 19th April 2015. >> He will continue to serve as an ICG member representing NRO. >> >> Many thanks to Alan for the great contributions he has made to the CRISP Team and the numbers community in developing the IANA stewardship transition proposal for the IANA Numbering Services. >> Congratulations to Nurani as the new Vice Chair of the CRISP Team! >> >> >> Best Regards, >> Izumi Okutani >> Chair, the CRISP Team >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ianaxfer mailing list >> ianaxfer(a)nro.net >> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer > > > > > End of cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4 > *********************************************

2 1

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] Next Steps in the Process and the Community Engagement
by Nurani Nimpuno 10 Apr '15

10 Apr '15

FYI. An update from the APNIC 38 meeting in Fukuoka last month, and an outline of the next steps in the process. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno on behalf of the RIPE CRISP Team > Begin forwarded message: > > Date: 10 april 2015 20:35:48 CEST > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > To: "ianaxfer(a)nro.net" <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Next Steps in the Process and the Community Engagement > > Dear Colleagues, > > > As a follow up from APNIC39 Conference which was held in Fukuoka in March 2015, which discussed the next steps on preparation of implementation for the numbers proposal, summary of major discussion points are now available from the NRO website. > > https://www.nro.net/nro-and-internet-governance/iana-oversight/sla-developm… > > I would like to highlight three key points from the meeting. > > 1. The ability to choose the IANA Numbering Services operator > In course of developing the SLA, it was consulted at the meeting whether the ability to choose the IANA Numbering Services operator is a critical and essential part of the SLA contract. > It was confirmed at the meeting that : > > - The ability to choose the IANA Numbering Services operator is seen as one of the most important elements in ensuring the accountability of the IANA numbering function operator. > - As defined in the numbers community proposal, the possibility of changing the operator from ICANN in the future should remain open, which is expected to be reflected in the SLA. > - APNIC confirmed that the RIR would work on an SLA that is consistent with the numbers community proposal, to reflect the intention of the community. > > 2. Transparency in providing feedback on the implementation > - The proposal consolidated by the CRISP Team was developed based on the requirements announced by the NTIA in March 2014, with consensus from the numbers community. > Therefore, in case there are any concerns for implementation to be consistent with the numbers community proposal, including the ability to choose an operator for the IANA numbering services, it should be > communicated to the community's attention in a transparent manner. > > 3. Future steps in the community consultation on implementation > - The plan is to carry the community consultation over the course of the coming months at the RIR meetings - this APNIC meeting is the first of these. > - During this period, all regions will have the chance to discuss issues relevant to the drafting of the SLA. > - After all the regional consultations are complete and all these processes have run their course, we should have a final agreed SLA as the outcome, which would then be part of the implementation of the numbers community proposal. > > From this stage, the RIRs will be responsible in preparing implementation of the IANA stewardship transition for the IANA Numbering Services and consulting with the community on its implementation as needed, based on the numbers community proposal. > > In preparation for implementation, RIRs will be consulting with the community at the coming RIR meetings, as well as on the global ianaxfer(a)nro.net and each regional mailing lists as when appropriate. > > The CRISP Team have completed its role of developing the community based proposal for the IANA Numbering Services after its submission to the ICG but continues to be engaged in : > - Clarifying the intention of the proposal to the RIRs in preparing its implementation, in transparent manner with the community > - Share observation to the RIRs on community feedback received about implementation, whether it is consistent with the proposal > - Follow up with the RIRs on the status and latest timeline of the preparation of implementation > > As the next RIR meeting, where the community will be consulted on the status of implementation, ARIN35 Meeting will be held in San Francisco with a CRISP Panel at 11:00 AM-12:00 PM (UTC-7) Monday, 13 April, 2015. > Panelists will report on the Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship Proposal (CRISP) Team's proposal, which was submitted to the IANA Stewardship Coordination Group, as well as talk about current status and the next steps. > > http://www.cvent.com/events/arin-35-public-policy-and-members-meeting/agend… > > Online participation is possible for those who cannot attend the meeting physically, and I encourage the community members to join the community consultation at ARIN35. > > > Best Regards, > Izumi Okutani > Chair, the CRISP Team > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

1 0

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] Announcement of the new CRISP Team Vice Chair
by Nurani Nimpuno 10 Apr '15

10 Apr '15

FYI. Nurani Nimpuno on behalf of the RIPE CRISP Team > Begin forwarded message: > > Date: 10 april 2015 05:30:48 CEST > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > To: "ianaxfer(a)nro.net" <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Announcement of the new CRISP Team Vice Chair > > Dear Colleagues, > > > I am pleased to announce that Nurani Nimpuno has been elected as the new Vice Chair of the CRISP Team. > Based on the election was conducted at the 17th CRISP Team call on 8th April, she has replaced Alan Barrett who has been serving as the Vice Chair. > > Following his appointment as the CEO of AFRINIC, Alan Barrett will be resigning from the CRISP Team after 19th April 2015. > He will continue to serve as an ICG member representing NRO. > > Many thanks to Alan for the great contributions he has made to the CRISP Team and the numbers community in developing the IANA stewardship transition proposal for the IANA Numbering Services. > Congratulations to Nurani as the new Vice Chair of the CRISP Team! > > > Best Regards, > Izumi Okutani > Chair, the CRISP Team > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

1 0

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] Draft Agenda Re: CRISP 17th Teleconference Wednesday April 8th 2015 20:00 UTC
by Nurani Nimpuno 08 Apr '15

08 Apr '15

FYI. Please find below the agenda for tonight's CRISP Team conference call. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno on behalf of the RIPE CRISP Team > Begin forwarded message: > > Date: 8 april 2015 12:00:20 CEST > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > To: ianaxfer(a)nro.net > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Draft Agenda Re: CRISP 17th Teleconference Wednesday April 8th 2015 20:00 UTC > > Colleagues, > > > Please see below the draft agenda for the coming CRISP Team call at > UTC20:00 8th Apr. > > As in all CRISP Team calls, it is open to anyone to join as an observer. > > > Regards, > Izumi > > ---- > 1. Agenda Review > > 2. Election of the Vice-Chair > (To be chaired by non-voting member) > > 3. Actions Review > a. Notes from the last meeting > b. FAQ, CRISP Slides > c. Message to ICG about CWG-Stewardship > d. Share future steps with the community > e. Confirm with NRO about RIR's official response > (on proposal, future steps) > > 4. Update > a. ICG > b. RIR communities (including ARIN35) > c. CWG-Stewardship (Names) Co-Chairs, IETF > d. GAO > > 6. Confirm Status & Next Steps > a. SLA, Review Committee > b. Community engagement, engagement with RIRs > c. IPR > > 7. Next Meeting > > 8. AOB > ---- > > On 2015/04/08 13:05, German Valdez wrote: >> Hi >> >> CRISP 17th Teleconference will take place on Wednesday April 8th 2015 at >> 20:00 UTC. Meeting as usual is open to observers >> >> Sorry for the short notice. >> >> regards >> >> German Valdez >> NRO >> >> >> *CRISP Team 17th Meeting* >> Wednesday, April 8, 2015 >> 8:00 pm | Greenwich Time (Reykjavik, GMT) | 2 hrs >> >> *Join WebEx meeting >> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m9a21de42cf3b6330390d4f0824c18…> >> https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m9a21de42cf3b6330390d4f0824c18… >> >> Meeting number: 700 520 727 >> Meeting password: crisp >> >> *Join by phone* >> *0800-051-3810* Call-in toll-free number (UK) >> *+44-203-478-5289* Call-in toll number (UK) >> Access code: 700 520 727 >> Global call-in numbers >> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=382164…> | >> Toll-free calling restrictions >> <http://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ianaxfer mailing list >> ianaxfer(a)nro.net >> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

1 0

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] CRISP 17th Teleconference Wednesday April 8th 2015 20:00 UTC
by Nurani Nimpuno 08 Apr '15

08 Apr '15

FYI. Nurani Nimpuno on behalf of the RIPE CRISP Team > Begin forwarded message: > > From: German Valdez <german(a)nro.net> > Date: 8 april 2015 06:05:30 CEST > To: <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] CRISP 17th Teleconference Wednesday April 8th 2015 20:00 UTC > > Hi > > CRISP 17th Teleconference will take place on Wednesday April 8th 2015 at 20:00 UTC. Meeting as usual is open to observers > > Sorry for the short notice. > > regards > > German Valdez > NRO > > > CRISP Team 17th Meeting > Wednesday, April 8, 2015 > 8:00 pm | Greenwich Time (Reykjavik, GMT) | 2 hrs > > Join WebEx meeting <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m9a21de42cf3b6330390d4f0824c18…> > https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m9a21de42cf3b6330390d4f0824c18… <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m9a21de42cf3b6330390d4f0824c18…> > Meeting number: 700 520 727 > Meeting password: crisp > > Join by phone > 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) > +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) > Access code: 700 520 727 > Global call-in numbers <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=382164…> | Toll-free calling restrictions <http://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

1 0

[anti-abuse-wg] Meeting with Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs)
by Marco Hogewoning 23 Mar '15

23 Mar '15

On 20 Mar 2015, at 11:13, Sascha Luck [ml] <aawg(a)c4inet.net> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 04:31:53PM +0100, Marco Hogewoning wrote: > >> In response to feedback from the RIPE community, a more detailed >> report of this meeting has been prepared and is available here: >> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/lea-meetings/ripe-ncc-law-enforcement-me… > > Can I suggest that this be posted on ncc-announce also? I'm sure the > level of "partnership" with LEAs is of interest to the wider > membership beyond the subscribers of anti-abuse-wg. Dear Sascha, We have cooperated with NCA over the past several years to organise this specific annual event. We work together to shape the agenda, making sure it has relevance to the LEAs, and NCA also helps to make sure the relevant agencies receive an invitation. We have also taken your suggestion and shared this report with the membership via the ncc-announce mailing list. Regards Marco Hogewoning RIPE NCC

1 0

Meeting with Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs)
by Marco Hogewoning 20 Mar '15

20 Mar '15

Dear Colleagues, We recently held our seventh meeting for Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs), in partnership with the British National Crime Agency (NCA) and the other RIRs. Held on 12 March 2015, the purpose of this meeting was to discuss trends and developments that might impact the operations of LEAs and to gather the global law enforcement community’s perspective. A number of key points arose throughout the day: - The RIPE NCC highlighted that much of the information that LEAs required was publicly available and did not require a Dutch court order - Attendees agreed that the current multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance was preferable, but felt that LEAs and governments needed to engage more effectively within the existing structures - The relatively slow adoption of IPv6 and the spread of IP address sharing technologies such as Carrier Grade NAT will increasingly create issues around identifying specific end users - LEAs felt that cooperation with the private sector is extremely important and could improve greatly, but it was also understood that this came with additional costs In response to feedback from the RIPE community, a more detailed report of this meeting has been prepared and is available here: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/lea-meetings/ripe-ncc-law-enforcement-me… We would like to thank the NCA for its help in putting together this day and are looking forward to continue our engagement with the global law enforcement community. We are happy to answer any questions you may have about this meeting or our LEA engagement activities in general. Regards, Marco Hogewoning External Relations Officer - Technical Advisor RIPE NCC

4 3

Fwd: [CRISP-TEAM] Draft agenda Re: WebEx meeting invitation: CRISP Team 16th Teleconference Friday, March 13 2015
by Nurani Nimpuno 13 Mar '15

13 Mar '15

Please find below the agenda for the CRISP Call today. (Apologies for the lateness of this mail.) Kind regards, Nurani on behalf of the RIPE CRISP team Begin forwarded message: > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > Subject: [CRISP-TEAM] Draft agenda Re: WebEx meeting invitation: CRISP Team 16th Teleconference Friday, March 13 2015 > Date: 11 mars 2015 04:51:42 CET > To: German Valdez <german(a)nro.net>, "crisp(a)nro.net" <crisp(a)nro.net> > > CRISP Team, > > > Please see below the draft agenda for the coming CRISP Team meeting this > Friday, 13th March. > > I welcome your feedback on anything else you'd like to discuss. > > Thanks German for the inivitation for the meeting to the CRISP Team > mailing list. > > Would you help us send the invitation to the global IANAXFER list as > well? I'll follow up about the agenda. > > ---- > 1. Agenda Review > > 2. Actions Review > a. Agenda for 15th Meeting > b. Response to the ICG on incompatibilities > c. Questions from the ICG > > 3. Key updates > a. Update from ICG discussions (if any) > b. Discussions at APNIC39 Conference > > 4. Next steps: Preparing Implementation > a. SLA and Review Committee > b. the role of the CRISP Team > > 5. Handling of comments for the proposal > a. From the ICG > b. Informal feedback from others > c. FAQ > > 6. Other operational communities > a. Names discussions > b. Handling of IPR > > 7. Future Call > a. Needs basis/pre-plan monthly > > 6. AOB > ---- > > > Thanks, > Izumi > > > On 2015/03/10 22:37, German Valdez wrote: >>> >>> *CRISP Team 16th Teleconference* >>> Friday, March 13, 2015 >>> 1:00 pm | Greenwich Time (Reykjavik, GMT) | 2 hrs >>> >>> *Join WebEx meeting* >>> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m6e865d620513c70c8eab435c0e4dc…> >>> >>> Meeting number: 701 646 062 >>> Meeting password: crisp >>> >>> *Join by phone* >>> *0800-051-3810* Call-in toll-free number (UK) >>> *+44-203-478-5289* Call-in toll number (UK) >>> Access code: 701 646 062 >>> Global call-in numbers >>> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=376300…> | >>> Toll-free calling restrictions >>> <http://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf> >>> >>> Add this meeting >>> <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=mcb35d3ee6ba599275ee56bf933e99…>to >>> your calendar. >>> >>> Can't join the meeting?Contact support. <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/mc> >>> >>> IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please note that this WebEx service allows audio and other >>> information sent during the session to be recorded, which may be discoverable >>> in a legal matter. By joining this session, you automatically consent to such >>> recordings. If you do not consent to being recorded, discuss your concerns >>> with the host or do not join the session. >>>

1 0

Fwd: [CRISP-TEAM] WebEx meeting invitation: CRISP Team 16th Teleconference Friday, March 13 2015
by Nurani Nimpuno 10 Mar '15

10 Mar '15

FYI. The CRISP team will hold its 16th teleconference this Friday 14:00 CET. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno On behalf of the RIPE CRISP Team Begin forwarded message: > From: German Valdez <german(a)nro.net> > Subject: [CRISP-TEAM] WebEx meeting invitation: CRISP Team 16th Teleconference Friday, March 13 2015 > Date: 10 mars 2015 14:37:58 CET > To: <crisp(a)nro.net> > > > Dear Team > > Please find below the webex information for this Friday Teleconference. > > Please let me know if I can forward the invitation in the global list. > > Thanks > > German > > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> Date: 10 March 2015 11:24:57 pm AEST >> From: German Valdez <messenger(a)webex.com> >> Reply-To: <german(a)nro.net> >> To: <german(a)nro.net> >> Subject: (Forward to others) WebEx meeting invitation: CRISP Team 16th Teleconference >> >> You can forward this invitation to others. >> Hello, >> German Valdez invites you to join this WebEx meeting. >> >> CRISP Team 16th Teleconference >> Friday, March 13, 2015 >> 1:00 pm | Greenwich Time (Reykjavik, GMT) | 2 hrs >> >> Join WebEx meeting >> Meeting number: 701 646 062 >> Meeting password: crisp >> >> Join by phone >> 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) >> +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) >> Access code: 701 646 062 >> Global call-in numbers | Toll-free calling restrictions >> >> Add this meeting to your calendar. >> >> Can't join the meeting? Contact support. >> >> IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please note that this WebEx service allows audio and other information sent during the session to be recorded, which may be discoverable in a legal matter. By joining this session, you automatically consent to such recordings. If you do not consent to being recorded, discuss your concerns with the host or do not join the session. > > > _______________________________________________ > CRISP mailing list > CRISP(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp

1 0

IANA Stewardship and ICANN Accountability Dominate ICANN 52 Discussions
by Chris Buckridge 23 Feb '15

23 Feb '15

Dear colleagues, The 52nd ICANN meeting was held in Singapore from 8-12 February, attracting around 1800 participants on-site, as well as numerous remote participants. The issues surrounding the transition of IANA stewardship and ICANN accountability were again at the top of the agenda, and RIPE community members and RIPE NCC staff contributed to these discussions. Discussion of the CRISP Team Proposal As discussed in the RIPE Cooperation Working Group and elsewhere, the Internet numbers community submitted its proposal for future stewardship of the number-related IANA functions to the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group. This proposal, and the counterpart proposal regarding the IANA protocol parameter registries developed within the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), were discussed in various ICANN 52 sessions, with representatives of the CRISP team, including Izumi Okutani (CRISP team Chair), Alan Barrett (CRISP team Vice-chair) and Nurani Nimpuno (RIPE CRISP team representative) contributing to discussions and ensuring all aspects of the numbers community IANA stewardship proposal were correctly understood. The meeting provided opportunities for the RIR senior staff, CRISP team members, members of the ICG, ICANN staff, NTIA staff and representatives of the other IANA affected communities to discuss implementation and operational questions arising from the community proposals already delivered. It also provided an opportunity for initial discussions between legal personnel from the RIRs and ICANN regarding development of the Service Level Agreement covering operation of the IANA Numbering Services (as defined in the numbers community IANA proposal). Links to all of the sessions dealing with IANA stewardship transition are available at: https://ripe.net/iana-discussions ICANN Accountability The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) met numerous times during the week to continue its work identifying and developing solutions to accountability concerns, with a particular focus on those issues which the group identifies as critical ahead of the IANA stewardship transition. The link between these accountability solutions and a successful transition of the IANA stewardship was again emphasised by participants including Lawrence Strickling, the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and Administrator with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). RIPE NCC’s Athina Fragkouli is participating in the CCWG-Accountability as an ASO representative (alongside Izumi Okutani, Fiona Asonga and Jorge Villa), and will seek feedback from the RIPE community and provide updates as the group’s work progresses. Progress on the Naming Community Proposal Discussions during the week also focused heavily on the proposal currently under development by the Cross-Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (commonly referred to as the CWG-Stewardship). The CWG-Stewardship’s recent announcement regarding a revised timeline that would see its proposal delivered to the ICG in June 2015 was of particular interest. There were also discussions on the substantive concerns about whether ICANN itself or a new, external contracting company would hold the stewardship of the names-related IANA functions. The Chairs of the CWG-Stewardship have released a statement summarising developments coming out of ICANN 52: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-4-2015-02-12-en In addition, the ICANN Board issued a statement clarifying that it will promptly forward the proposals received from the ICG and the CCWG-Accountability to the NTIA, without modification: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-02-12-en Best regards, Chris Buckridge Senior External Relations Officer RIPE NCC

1 0

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] The CRISP Team Response to "Process concern regarding the RIR proposal development process "
by Nurani Nimpuno 07 Feb '15

07 Feb '15

Dear colleagues, Please find below the email sent by the CRISP chair Izumi Okutani to the global ianaxfer(a)nro.net mailing list. The mail addresses concerns raised by some members of the list after the submission of the CRISP proposal to the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG). We very much welcome your input in this discussion, as some of the points raised concerns the amount of community support this proposal holds. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno on behalf of the CRISP RIPE team Begin forwarded message: > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: The CRISP Team Response to "Process concern regarding the RIR proposal development process " > Date: 4 februari 2015 20:54:59 CET > To: "ianaxfer(a)nro.net" <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > > Dear all, > > > This is the CRISP Team Response to "Process concern regarding the RIR > proposal development process ", which is another post to icg-forum. > > Again, I welcome your comments and feedback about our reponse which is > likely to be a reference to the ICG. > > Explicit expressing support would be extremely helpful as well. > > > > Regards, > Izumi > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: The CRISP Team Response to "Process concern regarding the RIR > proposal development process " > Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 04:43:25 +0900 > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > To: icg-forum(a)icann.org > CC: crisp(a)nro.net <crisp(a)nro.net> > > Dear ICG members, > > > On 20 January 2015 Richard Hill wrote to the icg-forum list with a > number of concerns about the CRISP team process. > > http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00020.html > > The concerns expressed by Mr Hill were considered in depth during the > CRISP team proposal development process and had been discussed on the > ianaxfer mailing list with Mr Hill as well as other community members. > > The positions taken by the CRISP team was based on the consensus > position of the community. > > > Richard Hill wrote: > >> Certain legal questions were raised in discussions on the CRISP > mailing list >> (NRO IANAXFER), in particular regarding jurisdiction and dispute > resolution. >> The CRISP team apparently did not include anybody who had appropriate > legal >> expertise and it chose not to request outside legal expertise, see: >> https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000322.html > > Mr Hill’s objections to the position adopted by the CRISP team were well > documented in his emails to the ianaxfer mailing list, and were > discussed at length on the CRISP teleconferences (notes and audio > archives of these calls are available at https://nro.net/crisp-team). > Additionally, they were included in the CRISP team’s matrix of community > comments and concerns posted at: > https://www.nro.net/crisp-iana-xfer-summary-discussion-08012015 > > The CRISP team’s final position is effectively summarised in the text of > our response to the ICG RFP: > > “The RIRs, as the contractual party of this agreement, will draft the > specific language of this agreement. During the drafting process, the > RIRs are expected to consult their respective RIR communities, and that > the drafting process will be guided by the principles listed below.” > [Response to the ICG RFP on the IANA from the Internet Number Community, > p11] > > The RFP response then lists 11 IANA Service Level Agreement Principles. > This was based on taking into account of feedback on the ianaxfer > mailing list, to bring the proposal back to describing high level > principles. > > The CRISP team’s position took into account the concerns raised by Mr > Hill, and addressed some points he has raised, such as describing in the > proposal that RIRs are expected to consult their respective RIR > communities, as quoted earlier. > > The CRISP Team was also informed by other feedback received via the > ianaxfer mailing list, particularly those mails which explicitly > supported the approach of delegating contract authorship to the RIR > legal teams. Posts by Hans Petter Holen (7 Jan,10 Jan) Seun Ojedeji (7 > Jan) Gerard Ross (11 January), Jim Reid (12 January), Andrew Dul (12 > January) and Dmitry Burkov (13 January) specifically endorsed this view. > All of these mails can be read at: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/date.html > > A further concern noted by Mr Hill: >> That is, how can NTIA be expected to approve a proposal when important >> details are left open and have not been reviewed or endorsed by the global >> multi-stakeholder community? > > The CRISP team has crafted a proposal that reflects the value that the > community places on the number-related IANA functions. This is reflected > in the proposal to safeguard the RIR communities’ stewardship over these > functions via a contractual relationship. It is the responsibility of > the parties to a contract to negotiate a contract. The CRISP team > believes that by directing the RIRs to consult with their communities > and by laying down the principles mentioned above, we have established a > framework within which the RIR legal staff can effectively negotiate in > the best interests of the community. > > Finally, Mr Hill has expressed that "there was limited input and the > outcome was largely influenced by the CRISP team and the RIR staff”. As > noted above, there were numerous posts to the ianaxfer mailing list, > many of which touched specifically on the issues discussed by Mr Hill. > From 17 October 2014 to 29 January 2015 there were 372 mails to the > ianaxfer list and 134 subscribers - information on the list is available > at: https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer > > I hope that this is a useful explanation of the CRISP team’s position in > regard to the issues raised by Mr Hill. I am of course happy to discuss > any of these issues in greater depth if this would be helpful. > > > Yours sincerely, > > Izumi Okutani > Chair, the CRISP Team > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

5 4

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] IANA stewardship transition session at ICANN52 Singapore (2/8 & 2/9)
by Nurani Nimpuno 06 Feb '15

06 Feb '15

FYI. Nurani Begin forwarded message: > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > Date: 6 februari 2015 14:00:55 CET > To: "ianaxfer(a)nro.net" <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] IANA stewardship transition session at ICANN52 Singapore (2/8 & 2/9) > > Colleaugues, > > > There will be two sessions at ICANN32 Singapore Meeting that cover the > IANA stewardship transition. > > You can join both sessions remotely. > > The seond session will be sharing overview of proposals/situation of all > three operational communities of the IANA function, and have discussions > with the participants. There will be presentation on the CRISP Team's > work for the number resources. > > > * Sunday, 8 February 2015 17:30 to 19:00 SGT > - IANA Stewardship Transition/Enhancing ICANN Accountability > Information Session > - > http://singapore52.icann.org/en/schedule/sun-iana-stewardship-accountability > > * Monday, 9 February 2015 10:15 to 13:00 SGT > - Responses to the ICG RFP Regarding the IANA Stewardship Transition > - http://singapore52.icann.org/en/schedule?date=2015-02-09 > > > Regards, > Izumi > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

1 0

Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] The CRISP Team Response to "CRISP - Process Concerns"
by Nurani Nimpuno 06 Feb '15

06 Feb '15

Dear colleagues, Please find below another email sent by the CRISP chair Izumi Okutani to the global ianaxfer(a)nro.net mailing list. As stated in my previous mail, we very much welcome the RIPE community's continued input in this discussion on the ianaxfer(a)nro.net mailing list. Kind regards, Nurani Nimpuno on behalf of the CRISP RIPE team Begin forwarded message: > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Fwd: The CRISP Team Response to "CRISP - Process Concerns" > Date: 4 februari 2015 20:53:49 CET > To: "ianaxfer(a)nro.net" <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > > Dear all, > > > I would like to share the CRISP Team Response to "CRISP - Process > Concerns", which has been posted to icg-forum. > > I welcome your comments and feedback about our reponse which is likely > to be a reference to the ICG. > > Explicit expressing support would be extremely helpful as well. > > > > Regards, > Izumi > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: The CRISP Team Response to "CRISP - Process Concerns" > Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 04:37:01 +0900 > From: Izumi Okutani <izumi(a)nic.ad.jp> > To: icg-forum(a)icann.org > > Dear ICG members, > > > On 22 January 2015 Guru Acharya wrote to the icg-forum list with a > number of concerns about the CRISP team process. > > http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum/msg00024.html > > The CRISP Team was not able to confirm concrete evidence/facts on these > concerns, as explained below. > > We also note that while present as an observer on a number of CRISP > teleconferences, we did not observe Guru Archaya raising any of these > concerns on ianaxfer(a)nro.net mailing list or on any of the regional > community lists on which the CRISP process was being discussed. > > > Guru Acharya writes: > >> I would like to highlight the following concerns about the process > adopted >> by CRISP, which disqualify it from satisfying the criteria of following a >> bottom-up multi-stakeholder process as mandated by the NTIA. >> >> 1) Top-down composition and selection of CRISP team: The CRISP team was a >> closed group selected by the RIR executive committee by way of an > interview >> process. Interested participants were excluded from the working group if >> they did not successfully qualify for the interviews conducted by the RIR >> executive committee. The selection criteria for the candidates was > not made >> public by the RIR executive committee. This is important given that >> non-CRISP participants were excluded from the decision-making process. > > > Before setting up the CRISP Team, RIRs published the process for > producing a single proposal from the global IP addressing community to > the NTIA, and there was an opportunity for discussions on the public > <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> mailing list as below: > > On 16 October the five RIRs published a process for producing a single > proposal from the global IP addressing community to the NTIA. > https://www.nro.net/news/iana-stewardship-consolidated-rir-iana-stewardship… > > According to this process the CRISP team would consist of 15 members, > two appointees from each RIR region who are not RIR staff, and one RIR > staff member from each region, who shall assist with the submission > development effort. Each RIR was to appoint their CRISP team members by > a method of its own choosing by 15 November 2014. There was some > discussion on the public <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> mailing list on 21 October > about standardising a CRISP team selection process across all five RIR > regions, but no broader community support was expressed for this change. > See: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2014-October/000016.html > > Following this announcement each of the five RIRs announced an open call > for participants, to which any one could express their interest, as well > as the process according to which the selection of the CRISP members > would be conducted. The process and relevant announcements of each RIR > are described in the Internet Number Community Response to the ICG RFP > (sections VI.B.1-VI.B.5 on "Community Process"). > > In most cases the RIR executive committees made the final selection of > CRISP representatives from community volunteers. At no point in the > process were any explicit objections raised to any of the CRISP team > members, nor were any appeals made by volunteers not selected to join > the CRISP team. > >> >> 2) Top-down decision-making by the CRISP team: While the general > public was >> invited to provide comments for the draft proposals prepared by > CRISP, they >> were excluded from the decision-making process. Commenters were merely >> informed that their input had either been accepted or rejected by the > CRISP >> team after due consideration. Notably, non-CRISP participants were not >> allowed to contribute to CRISP's tele-conferences or CRISP's internal >> mailing list, where the actual decision-making took place. Mere >> consultation of the general public without their involvement in the >> decision-making process does not constitute a bottom-up multi-stakeholder >> process. > > > Each of the RIR communities had conducted discussions on the IANA > stewardship transition for the IANA Numbering Services and the role of > the CRISP Team is to consolidate it as a single global proposal. > > https://www.nro.net/nro-and-internet-governance/iana-oversight/consolidated… > > The proposal to establish a CRISP team was distributed to all of the RIR > communities and the <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> mailing list established on 16 > October 2015. The first CRISP team teleconference was held on 9 December > 2015. This provided the community with nearly two months during which > they could comment on or object to any elements of the proposal to set > up the CRISP team (as noted above, there was some discussion around 21 > October relating to CRISP team selection processes, but there was not > community support for changing the proposed process). > > The CRISP team members agreed with the arrangements laid out in the > proposal (while developing some additional mechanisms, including the > internal CRISP mailing list and a working definition of quorum for the > group). CRISP team members also understood a key part of their role to > be facilitating input from the regional communities, and this was > evident throughout the process - teleconference notes from the third > teleconference onwards record various CRISP team members conveying input > from their regional mailing lists. > > Invitations to join the CRISP Team Teleconferences as observers were > sent to <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> mailing list, which were forwarded to mailing > lists of RIR regions by the CRISP Team members. > > Subscription to <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> mailing list was open to anyone, and > there was no restrictions on posting comments to the list, including > making comments about the CRISP Team discussions at any of the CRISP > Team Teleconferences. > > A concrete record of all the concerns raised by the community on various > mailing lists was prepared by the CRISP team and made available at: > https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/NRODiscussionList_20150116.pdf > > This spreadsheet indicated the issue, the initial mail in which the > issue was raised, the CRISP team's discussion of the issue and the > current CRISP team position. This clearly demonstrates that the process > of community participation facilitated by the CRISP team worked smoothly > to address a wide range of community input throughout the process. > >> >> 3) Lack of information and transparency: The CRISP team had two mailing >> lists. The mailing list used internally by the CRISP team was a closed >> mailing list that was not publicly archived till after the proposal was >> finalised. This resulted in community evaluation of the process and >> proposal in the absence of requisite information about the reasons > for any >> decisions. > > As noted in the initial CRISP team proposal and charter, "The CRISP team > shall also work through a public mailing list and the archive of such > mailing list will be publicly available. The name of the mailing list > will be <ianaxfer(a)nro.net>. > > At its initial teleconference, CRISP team members suggested that a > separate mailing list for use by CRISP team members only would be useful > in the interest of efficiency and to allow quick editing iterations on > the proposed response. > https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/CRISP-December-9-meeting-DRAFT-NOTES… > > While there was general agreement, concerns about transparency were also > noted, resulting in a commitment to publish archives of the internal > list at the time of publishing the first draft (19 December 2014). The > archive was publicly available from this point and some CRISP team > members shared a link to the archive with their communities directly. A > direct link to this mailing list archive was posted to the ianaxfer > mailing list and on the NRO CRISP webpage after 8 January 2015 due to an > oversight, while the archives were publicly made available when the > first draft of the proposal was published on 19 December. > > The archive of the internal mailing list is available at: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/crisp/ > > It is possible to confirm from our announcements that links to the > archives of the CRISP team mailing list was intended to be shared from > publication of the first draft proposal: > > "Details of all the CRISP team's work to date, including recordings, > minutes and agendas of all CRISP teleconferences and a public archive > of the internal CRISP team mailing list, are available at: > https://nro.net/crisp-team" > > https://www.nro.net/news/first-draft-proposal-of-the-internet-number-commun… > > https://www.nro.net/news/internet-number-community-iana-stewardship-proposa… > > >> >> 4) Refusal to deal with essential aspects of the proposal: The CRISP team >> refused to deal with essential aspects of proposal such as the contract >> renewal process, contract duration, jurisdiction, arbitration process, >> review process, high level details of the contract, intellectual property >> rights, charter of the review team and service levels. The CRISP team > cited >> these essential aspects as outside the scope of the CRISP mandate. If the >> CRISP mandate is indeed so limited, then its incomplete proposal > should be >> returned to the RIR community with the suggestion of expanding the > mandate >> of the CRISP team. Note that the charter of the CRISP team, which was >> prepared by the NRO EC in a top-down manner, does not suggest that such >> essential aspects should be excluded from the proposal. This limited >> interpretation of the agenda and issues by the CRISP team is against the >> ethos of a bottom-up multi-stakeholder process. > > As noted above, a concrete record of all the concerns raised by the > community on various mailing lists was prepared by the CRISP team and > made available at: > https://www.nro.net/crisp-iana-xfer-summary-discussion-08012015 > > This spreadsheet, the records and notes from CRISP teleconferences and > the archived mails on both the internal and public mailing lists > demonstrate that the CRISP team closely considered all issues, concerns > or suggestions raised by the community via ianaxfer(a)nro.net or the > regional discussion lists. Where specific suggestions were not reflected > in the proposal, detailed justification was provided to the community > via the ianaxfer mailing list. > > While the CRISP team did note certain constraints on its remit, as it > understood that remit, the issues noted by Guru Acharya were addressed > specifically in the following mails to the public <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > mailing list: > > Contract details in general, including renewal process, duration: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000213.html > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2014-December/000135.html > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2014-December/000143.html > > Jurisdiction: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000331.html > > Arbitration process: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000331.html > > Review process: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2014-December/000134.html > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000172.html > > Intellectual property rights: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2014-December/000145.html > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2014-December/000127.html > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000342.html > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000173.html > > Charter of the review team: > https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/2015-January/000320.html > > While developing the proposal, the CRISP team was conscious about its > remit and responsibility. In the process of addressing issues and the > elements of the proposal the team felt that it was important to identify > the critical components and implementation requirements, rather than > work out the actual implementation details. Our position was that the > latter should be developed by qualified RIR legal teams following the > best practices in this field. As stated in the response to the ICG "The > RIRs, as the contractual party of this agreement, will draft the > specific language of this agreement. During the drafting process, the > RIRs are expected to consult their respective RIR communities, and that > the drafting process will be guided by the principles listed below." > [Response to the ICG RFP on the IANA from the Internet Number Community, > p11] > > We believe that the proposal submitted to the ICG meets the expectations > of the numbers community, while not extending into areas beyond the > authority or expertise of the CRISP team. > > I hope that this effectively addresses the issues raised in this email, > and I would be happy to expand further on any issues you feel could > benefit from more explanation. > > > Yours sincerely, > Izumi Okutani > Chair, the CRISP Team > > > > _______________________________________________ > ianaxfer mailing list > ianaxfer(a)nro.net > https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer

3 2