[Internal-cg] Thinking about the assessment process
Lynn at lstamour.org
Wed Jan 7 19:36:19 UTC 2015
Thank you Alissa, I also think this is a reasonable process. And, I particularly like Daniel's suggestion below.
As an IAB appointee to the ICG, I followed very carefully the process followed by the IETF, participating in associated Working Group/review processes. I have had no involvement with the proposals of the names or number communities beyond reading publicly available documents.
On Jan 7, 2015, at 3:31 AM, Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net> wrote:
> This makes sense to me.
> I suggest that before we start the reviews each of us sends a message to this list describing their involvement, if any, in the development of proposals. This way all that is on record and we avoid accusations of hidden interests or actions.
> For myself I can state that I have had no involvement with the proposals of the names and protocol parameters communities.
> As a member of the RIPE community I have participated in the public discussion about the principles for the numbers proposal. As part of my job at the RIPE NCC I have provided advice to management about the development of the proposal. I have also worked actively within the RIR communities to explain the process and the work of the ICG.
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
More information about the Internal-cg