On 18 Oct 2016, at 10:09, Carsten Schiefner <ripe-wgs.cs@schiefner.de> wrote:
in the light of transparency, will resp. can the contract be disclosed?
If not, is it a contract (draft) that has been put on the table by the NCC? Or, vice versa, VeriSign's standard contract for such services? Or rather - as a result of heavy negotiations in smoke filled rooms behind closed doors ;-) - an amalgam of both?
Also, how (far) the three final bidders met the RfP requirements would be interesting. I don't mind if the names of the non-winning two would be anonymized.
Hi Carsten. The contractual terms are implementation detail and therefore out of scope for the WG. This also applies to the RFP and NCC’s selection procedure. The WG should only intervene here -- ie by asking the NCC board to investigate -- if we have reason to believe the RFP and/or contract was unfair or defective in some way. The WG must not and can’t (try to) micromanage the NCC’s DNS team.