Ray, Sam, does signing in parallel work for you? If so, and if we hear back from you before Wednesday’s call, I think we can cancel the call since this is the main item we would need to discuss. Please advise.

Thanks,
Alissa

> On Sep 27, 2016, at 2:25 PM, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett@afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>
>> On 27 Sep 2016, at 22:13, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I haven't seen any responses to this, so I'm curious how this is being handled.
>>
>> In the interests of time, it might make sense to sign in counterparts (i.e., each signatory signs on its own sheet of paper), rather than in sequence.  This will be legally effective.  Signatories can always execute on a single document later on, for posterity.  (In other words, this should be signed in parallel, rather than serially.)
>
> I agree with signing in parallel.  The documents explicitly allow this; for example, clause 7.9 of the Commuity Agreement says:
>
> 7.9       Counterparts.  This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute together the same document.
>
> Alan Barrett

> _______________________________________________
> Iana-ipr mailing list
> Iana-ipr@nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr