As one of those that suggested the work of RC be assigned to NRO-NC globally (even though did not successfully convince the CRISP) during the proposal development, I support the suggestion made by Hans.
Cheers! On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Hans Petter Holen <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear RIPE community, > > As you may be aware, the proposal for IANA stewardship developed by the > CRISP Team (and now incorporated into the IANA Stewardship Transition > Coordination Group’s proposal) proposes establishing a community-based > Review Committee to assist the RIRs in their periodic review of the IANA > numbering services Service Level Agreement. > > In recent months, the NRO Executive Council circulated a draft charter for > this Review Committee, noting that the Review Committee “will comprise 15 > members, constituted by: (a) two community appointees from each RIR region > (who must not be RIR staff); and (b) one RIR staff from the region (who > will be a non-voting member).” The charter also notes that “Each RIR shall > appoint their Review committee members by a method of its own choosing.” > > > https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/Review-Committee-Charter-draft-Public-v1.pdf > > The RIR Executive Council have indicated that they would like to establish > this Review Committee in the coming months (ahead of the IANA stewardship > transition), so it is important that the RIPE community come to consensus > on how we will select our Review Committee members, and who those members > will be. > > I would like to suggest a solution for your consideration and discussion: > we currently have three community representatives on the NRO Number > Council, two of which are elected by the community (the third is appointed > by the RIPE NCC Executive Board). Acknowledging that the work of the Review > Committee will likely be quite limited, I suggest that we appoint the two > community-elected NRO Number Council representatives as our representatives > to the Review Committee. The third, non-voting member of the Review > Committee, who will be a RIPE NCC staff member, would then be appointed by > the RIPE NCC Executive Board. > > I believe that this is a straight forward and efficient proposal that > would avoid an extra election process. It is based on our long-standing NRO > Number Council process and employing the knowledge and talents of > individuals who clearly have the trust of the RIPE community. > > It is important, however, that the community agree on a method for > selecting Review Committee members, so if you support this method I would > appreciate that you do so on the RIPE list ([email protected]) by > Monday, 28 September. > > If this proposal is not acceptable we will conduct a separate IANA Review > Committee selection process that would need to be planned prior to the RIPE > 71 in November. > > I look forward to hearing your thoughts. > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Hans Petter Holen, RIPE Chair > email: [email protected] | http://hph.oslo.net > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>[email protected] <[email protected]>* Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
