[Internal-cg] Fwd: Information requested
Daniel Karrenberg
daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net
Sun Mar 8 16:55:56 UTC 2015
Kavouss,
how the IETF and the five RIRs are currently accountable to their
communities is clearly described in the responses that we have. The
details are described in a number of normative documents of the
communities themselves. These structures have evolved over decades; so
they are not freshly designed and simple. On the other hand they are not
overly complex either. With a little effort they can be understood by
anyone. As with any subject that effort is required for full understanding.
The proposed accountability of the ICANN functions operator to the
existing structures is fully described in the responses that we have
received. These descriptions are very clear to me.
So in order to progress I suggest that you ask concrete questions that
may help us to understand these structures better. Asking general
questions is not going to provide answers that are different from those
we already have.
Daniel
On 8.03.15 16:52 , Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
> Dear Jopseph,
> May I explain a little bit the objectives of the querry.
> The terms and condition and status of accountabilty currently applied to
> Protocole and numbers are not clear.
> The presentation of these accountability are too complex and it is not
> clear who is accountable to whom
> I raised this question to Jari , representing Protocol and he agreed to
> provide diagram clearly indicating the hierarchy of the implementation
> and application of the accountavblity as curremntly practiced.
> The same is valid for numbers
> Then in regard with the accountabilty after transition sebveral
> paragraphs spread over various pages deal with7 addressing the post
> transition accountabilty.
> For me as an ICG member .it is not clear what are the consequence of
> transition in regard with accoutabilty before and after transition .
> For thse reasons I asked for a comparative tabulated form indicating the
> accountabilty at various level and the corresponding hierarchy before
> and after transition.
> Should you have a better way to have such a tabular form which
> I referred to it as comparative and you seems not to be happy with such
> term ,please guide me.
> But currently the suituation is tiotally vague
> Regards
> Kavouss
>
> 2015-03-08 16:29 GMT+01:00 joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com
> <mailto:joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com>>:
>
> Colleagues
>
> Perhaps we should develop a set of questions for all communities to
> answer. I'm not sure that its appropriate to ask communities to
> develop comparative documents.
>
> Best-
>
> Joe
>
> On 3/8/2015 11:00 AM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>> Step 2 ,ICG Assessement of Cummunity proposals
>> Dear Vice chair,
>> May you please ask TWO OPERATIONAL COMMUNITIES a) ProtoCOL
>> & Parameters and b) Nummbers to Kindly provide the followings;
>> A COMPARATIVE Table indicating the prcess of accountability
>> currently in force and implemented and those which will be
>> required after Transitiion.
>> It would be useful to have that comparative Table enabling ICG
>> Members to better undersatnd how the accountability of Protocol
>> Parameter and Numbers are affected by Transition.
>> The reports of these two communities are difficult to make such a
>> comparision.
>> Without that I will have serious difficulties to comment on the
>> exacteness and appropriateness of the content of these two
>> comminities on accountability before and after transition.
>> By the way, Jari promised to provide a graphic Diagram regarding
>> internal accountability being carried out by IETF
>> mOREOVER, aLAN bARRET / Paul Wilson ,are respectfully requested to
>> provide similar graphic Diagram about the accountability currently
>> in force in RIRs ,in particular that RIRs have a more
>> decentralized process of five regional communities and the overall
>> accountabilities of the entire Rir s are not clear
>> Rergards
>>
>> 2015-03-08 15:06 GMT+01:00 Kavouss Arasteh
>> <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>:
>>
>> Dear Patrik
>> Thank you for reply
>> The question addressed to two operational communities
>> represented by Jari and Paul or Alan . If my request was not
>> properly formulated I hereby correct that in raising these
>> questions and seeking clarifications from protocol and numbers
>> operational communities AND NOT to ANY ICG MEMBER
>> Regards
>> Kavouss
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 8 Mar 2015, at 09:47, Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se
>> <mailto:paf at frobbit.se>> wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> This I treat as a request from an ICG member for further
>>> explanation by other ICG members.
>>>
>>> Patrik
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>>> *From:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>
>>>> *Date:* 8 mars 2015 08:30:25 CET
>>>> *To:* Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se
>>>> <mailto:paf at frobbit.se>>, Mohamed El Bashir
>>>> <mbashir at mbash.net <mailto:mbashir at mbash.net>>, Alissa
>>>> Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in <mailto:alissa at cooperw.in>>
>>>> *Subject:* *Information requested*
>>>>
>>>> À *Patrik*, *Mohamed*, Alissa, WUKnoben, ICG
>>>>
>>>> Step 2 ,ICG Assessement of Cummunity proposals
>>>> Dear Vice chair,
>>>> May you please ask Jari and Alan Barret or Paul Wilson to
>>>> provide the foloowings;
>>>> A COMPARATIVE Table indicating the prcess of accountability
>>>> currently in force and implemented and those which will be
>>>> required after Transitiion.
>>>> It would be useful to have that comparative Table enabling
>>>> ICG Members to better undersatnd how the accountability of
>>>> Protocol Parameter and Numbers are affected by Transition.
>>>> The reports of these two communities are difficult to make
>>>> such a comparision.
>>>> Without that I will have serious difficulties to comment on
>>>> the exacteness and appropriateness of the content of these
>>>> two comminities on accountability before and after transition.
>>>> By the way, Jari promised to provide a graphic Diagram
>>>> regarding internal accountability being carried out by IETF
>>>> mOREOVER, aLAN bARRET / Paul Wilson ,are respectfully
>>>> requested to provide similar graphic Diagram about the
>>>> accountability currently in force in RIRs ,in particular
>>>> that RIRs have a more decentralized process of five regional
>>>> communities and the overall accountabilities of the entire
>>>> Rir s are not clear
>>>> Rergards
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Internal-cg mailing list
>>> Internal-cg at ianacg.org <mailto:Internal-cg at ianacg.org>
>>> http://ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at ianacg.org <mailto:Internal-cg at ianacg.org>
>> http://ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at ianacg.org <mailto:Internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> http://ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at ianacg.org
> http://ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>
More information about the Internal-cg
mailing list