[Iana-transition] Fwd: [NRO-IANAXFER] Call for comments on the CRISP Review of the SLA

[Sweeting, John]

FYI, please see the call for comments on the SLA based on the numbers
community proposal below. Thanks.


>
>
>-------- Forwarded Message --------
>Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Call for comments on the CRISP Review of the SLA
>Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 08:21:00 +0900
>From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp>
>To: ianaxfer at nro.net <ianaxfer at nro.net>
>
>Dear Colleagues,
>
>
>
>As announced by the NRO, the SLA text based on the numbers community
>proposal is open for the community consultation by the NRO.
>
>
>https://www.nro.net/news/call-for-comments-for-a-draft-sla-for-the-iana-nu
>mbering-services
>
>We would like to share the CRISP Team's review of the SLA, and welcome
>comments from the community on the review before: Tue 9th June UTC23:59.
>
>The CRISP Team review was based on the principles below:
>
> - The review focuses and limits its scope on whether the SLA is
>consistent with the numbers community proposal.
> - Specific legal provisions in the SLA are therefore outside the scope
>of this review.
> - We note that not all elements of the numbers community proposal which
>is to be implemented in the SLA;
>   There are implementation to be handled outside the SLA, such as
>transfer of the IPR which belong to the public domain (e.g.IANA
>trademark, iana.org domain), and setting up of the Review Committee.
>
>Feedback from the community on <ianaxfer at nro.net> will be taken into
>consideration with the same principles as described above.
>
>Overall, the CRISP Team found that the SLA is consistent with the numbers
>community proposal.
>However there are a few points where we observed more clarifications are
>needed, could be read as more definitive than what has bene agreed, or
>the SLA text could be interpreted as not being consistent.
>Please see the attached review for more details.
>
>We note that on Article 10, there were some differences in opinion on
>whether it is consistent with the numbers community proposal.
>Further discussion in the CRISP Team did not reveal any opposition to the
>version of the response we are sharing now with the community, before the
>deadline for comments within the CRISP Team.
>
>After closing the community feedback, we are planning to submit the CRISP
>Team's SLA review incorporating relevant community feedback to the NRO by
>14th June UTC23:59 deadline.
>
>
>Izumi Okutani, Nurani Nimpuno
>Chair, Vice Chair of the CRISP Team
>
>
>


This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Review of the SLA-20150603.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 98338 bytes
Desc: Review of the SLA-20150603.pdf
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20150604/31c18897/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ????????
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20150604/31c18897/attachment.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00001.txt
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/iana-transition/attachments/20150604/31c18897/attachment.txt>