<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>First, I want to thank the NRO NC for the clear and considerable
work they have put into this document. Although I recall extensive
work on ICP-2, I think this has exceeded the initial work by an
order of magnitude.</p>
<p>I also want to thank the ARIN region members of the NRO NC for
their webinar today on the new document. Nick in particular did a
great job of providing much of the context for why the document
reads as it does. Great job, and thank you.</p>
<p>In reaction to that webinar, I have taken some time to read the
document closely. My notes are below, but for reference I also
pasted it into a Google Doc where my edits and comments may be
clearer in context: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Sw1U1o4W7-ZkzsZOHvzYpJycsqQhRbRSgjzkryXU8P4/edit?usp=sharing">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Sw1U1o4W7-ZkzsZOHvzYpJycsqQhRbRSgjzkryXU8P4/edit?usp=sharing </a></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>ORGANIZATION</p>
<p>Broadly, I think the organization makes sense. There are a few
places that I thought were confusing:</p>
<p>1. Use of outline format 1.1(a)(i)(A) made it really difficult to
keep track of where I was. It's easier to see the hierarchy with
1.1.1.1.1, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's an accessibility
guideline.</p>
<p>2. There are several items in 2.3 that are more fully discussed
in later sections. At the least, cross-reference Regonition and
Derecognition with their respective sections. To illustrate what I
mean, here's a partial outline, showing the same headings
repeated:</p>
<blockquote>Preamble<br>
Article 1: Definitions, Interpretation, and Implementation<br>
Article 2: Internet Numbers Registry System<br>
. . .<br>
2.3. Change to RIR Status. <br>
(a) Recognition<br>
(b) Dercognition<br>
(c) ICANN Decision<br>
2.4. Ad Hoc Audit. <br>
. . .<br>
Article 3: Recognition<br>
Article 4: Ongoing Commitments<br>
. . .<br>
4.2 Audit<br>
. . .<br>
Article 5: Emergency Continuity<br>
Article 6: Derecognition<br>
Article 7: Amendment
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.2;margin-left: -11pt;margin-right: -11pt;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:12pt;"></p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>DEFINITIONS</p>
<p>Generally, I think terms that only appear once do not need to be
in the Definitions section; they are better defined <i>in situ,</i> where
the context is provided. </p>
<p>Affiliate only appears once, 4.1(o), as part of Control, and only
as a participle. Just roll it into the definition of Control. </p>
<p>The ASO MoU doesn't need to be defined up front; spell it out the
one time it's mentioned, in the definition of Global Policy.</p>
<p>The definition of Control refers to control of an entity
participating in RIR governance. Every use of the term Control in
the document refers to control of the RIR. </p>
<p>Global Policy only appears once.</p>
<p>Internet Numbers Registry System has a definition, but also all
of Article 2 describing it. Maybe don't define it early.</p>
<p>Resource Holder specifies "registered with an RIR" which excludes
the few remaining organizations with delegations directly from
IANA.</p>
<p>RIR Services is very traditional; is support for RPKI an RIR
Service? It should be, since it has profound operational
implications. Maintenance of IPv6.ARPA and IN-ADDR.ARPA should
also explicitly in scope.</p>
<p>In several cases, it is unclear whether RIR or ICANN refer to the
staff, executive, Governing Body, or communities. In some cases
(audits, emergency continuity), it might even refer to a
contracted third party. It should be explicit--where I think the
community may be deciding something, another person might think
the CEO or Board speaks for the community. </p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>TERMS</p>
<p>2.3(a)(i) says a Proposal for Recognition must be submitted, but
doesn't say what needs to be in it. Hours later, I read section
3.1. Suggest: <b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-02576382-7fff-4900-af52-2497015876aa"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">by submitting a Proposal for Recognition, as specified in 3.1, in writing </span></b></p>
<p>It is unclear how a Candidate RIR and incumbent RIR would
negotiate for territory. It's mentioned in 3.1(a), but I would
think a Candidate RIR should have support from the affected RIR
before event submitting a Proposal.</p>
<p>2.3(a)(v)(C) references 2.3(a)(iii), which is for Approval, but
also needs to include the following subsection on Rejection.</p>
<p>2.4 "Compliance with this document" is pretty good. But is the
audit conducted by ICANN staff, or consultants, and/or in
conjunction with the other RIRs? What happens to the audit? Does
it go to the ICANN Board, the subject RIR, the full NRO, is it
published? Is the subject RIR expected to respond? Remediate?
Appeal? It's weird to have the so far separated from 4.2. Aren't
they the same? At the very least, cross-reference them.</p>
<p>2.8 "reasonable timeframes" sounds good, but I just want to point
out that getting at least one meeting cycle out of every Board and
Numbering Community plus ICANN almost certainly requires at least
two years. That's after years of building regional support for a
new RIR, or after an RIR is in failure.</p>
<p>3.1(f) I would like to strike "relative to the then-existing
state of affairs." It is conceivable that we can see an event
happening 2-3 years from now, and take action to improve the
system in preparation for that event. If the improvement can only
be to current state, then we have to wait for things to get worse
before we can make them better.</p>
<p>4.1(g) I would like to add "periodically" before "elected."
Governing Body members may not be elected for life. </p>
<p>5.1(a) "<b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-d6da0703-7fff-6593-e89e-fdd7acc39f98"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">An Emergency Continuity may only be initiated" </span></b><span
id="docs-internal-guid-d6da0703-7fff-6593-e89e-fdd7acc39f98"><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">by whom? </span><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">If a natural disaster affects the RIR HQ and surrounding area, who is authorized to declare an Emergency Continuity (event)?</span></span></p>
<p>5.1(c) "must cooperate" to the extent reasonably possible. In the
case of major natural disaster, there may not be anybody who can
cooperate. </p>
<p>5.1(d) "<b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-e88a4ca5-7fff-a0dd-b43e-e0b123283709"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">unless renewed pursuant to the conditions" </span><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">is unclear; there are no renewal provisions. I </span></b>propose:
"But may be continued by repeating the steps to initiate an
Emergency Continuity"</p>
<p>6.2 I propose to strike "if requested." Several failure modes may
leave an RIR without someone to make the request.</p>
<p>6.2 "<b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-4396eaed-7fff-8a72-51f6-e4ad0aa5bb08"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">outweigh the benefits of continuing to tolerate"</span><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> I would like to add "or mitigate." It's more consistent with derecognition being a last resort, and giving the RIR a chance to fix things.</span></b></p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-4396eaed-7fff-8a72-51f6-e4ad0aa5bb08"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">
</span></b></p>
<p>WORD CHOICES AND TYPOGRAPHICAL</p>
<p>Preamble paragraph 3 has a stray space before the first line. </p>
<p>Change</p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-d7d7f914-7fff-7f75-e6f6-ceae281eed12"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">This Governance Document for the Recognition, Operation, and Derecognition of Regional Internet Registries (the “RIR Governance Document”) succeeds the document Internet Coordination Policy‑2...</span></b></p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-d7d7f914-7fff-7f75-e6f6-ceae281eed12"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">to</span></b></p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-d7d7f914-7fff-7f75-e6f6-ceae281eed12"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">This Governance Document for the Recognition, Operation, and Derecognition of Regional Internet Registries (the “RIR Governance Document”) supersedes the document Internet Coordination Policy‑2...</span></b></p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-d7d7f914-7fff-7f75-e6f6-ceae281eed12"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">"Succeeds" means "comes after." We intend to replace ICP-2.</span></b></p>
<p>2.3(v)(A) replace "outline" with "describe." We need the details,
here.</p>
<p>2.3(c)(i) change decision to Notice of Decision. Notice of
Decision is a defined term, and should be explicitly used here to
require ICANN to publish the formal Notice, not just yea or nay.</p>
<p>4.1(n) replace "community" with "Numbering Community" to make
explicit that the RIRs must convene multistakeholder meetings, not
just Number Resource Holders or Members.</p>
<p>5.1 Replace</p>
<p> "<b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-1cfb1384-7fff-7514-c929-271dc447b385"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;">If an RIR is unable to adequately provide all or any part of its RIR Services to its Service Region,"</span></b></p>
<p>with</p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-1cfb1384-7fff-7514-c929-271dc447b385"><span
style="font-size:13pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre;white-space:pre-wrap;"> "If an RIR is unable to adequately provide all or any part of its RIR Services for its Service Region,"</span></b></p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-1cfb1384-7fff-7514-c929-271dc447b385"><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I can imagine failure modes where people inside the region can do WHOIS lookups, validate ROAs, and search ipv6.arpa, but where people outside the region can't reach those services. However, the RIRs have a responsibility to the global community, not just their region. </span></b></p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-1cfb1384-7fff-7514-c929-271dc447b385"><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Footnote 1, typo in "accessible." Also, please lit the URL rather than buying it under "here"<b>.</b></span></b></p>
<p><b style="font-weight:normal;"
id="docs-internal-guid-1cfb1384-7fff-7514-c929-271dc447b385"><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><b>
</b></span></b></p>
<p>Again, thank you to the entire NRO NC for all of the work you
have put into this. Although my notes here look lengthy, I think
you'll see that in almost every case, I agree with what you have
done, and propose only minor clarifications. </p>
<p>I look forward to seeing the document ratified!</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Lee Howard</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>