On 9 Apr 2019, at 17:22, Louie Lee <louie@louie.net> wrote:

Hi everyone,

Here are the updated slides I just presented. They mostly incorporated the suggested changes. (The currently posted procedures are still from last April but I spoke to it.)

Aside from the suggested changes from Nurani and Jason, I also added a TL;DR for the 2018 report:

TL;DR: 2 IPv4 allocations. 3 ASN requests. No indication of failure or near failure by IANA under the SLA. No concerns from community. Sufficient community outreach & involvement.

Louie

P.S. Perhaps we can incorporate a practice of regularly sharing our slides ahead of our presentations so that we can help each other improve our slides and deliver a consistent message. I know that my own presentation was better because of this.

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:42 AM Louie Lee <louie@louie.net> wrote:

Thanks for the feedback. I will try to incorporate them in time for resending to ARIN staff since my presentation is in 40 minutes.

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 8:26 AM Jason Schiller <jason-phone@schiller.net> wrote:

Slide 5: Role

That text is now the preamble of our operating procedures and not at the link at the bottom. 

Perhaps you can update the link to point to our procedures. 

Slide 7:   Current work status

User redefine operation procedures I would add:

- clarified RC member - community engagement

   — scoped to things relating to IANA services 

         performance

    — increased communication 

(This will nicely support your 2nd to the last slide)

—-Jason

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 5:54 AM Nurani Nimpuno <nurani@nimblebits.net> wrote:

Hi Louie,

Thanks for sharing this. It looks good. :)

I only have one comment and that is regarding the two informal comments after the public comment period.

First of all, I think it should be made more clear that there were no comments during the open comment period, and there were no modifications required to the report. While we encourage feedback in this period, we were also not surprised by the lack of comments, as there were no issues noted in our IANA RC report.

As for the two comments, if you include that, I think it needs to be made clear that they were not part of the public comment period and that they were minor ones. In fact, the one about the buttons was only sent to me informally and not to the RC, and stated "you can ignore this nit”, so I don’t think it needs to be given that prominence in the presentation.

I suggest making it a little clearer that the two comments we received were minor ones on the formatting/Accessibility and not on the substance. I think it’s fine to mention what they were in your talk, but I suggest removing the actual comments off the slide. Not because there is anything controversial in there, but as they were received after the public comment period, and as they were not included in the report, I think it causes confusion if you include the specific comments in your presentation.

Perhaps you can simply say that in our post-report evaluation, we discussed lessons learnt and further potential improvements for next year, and these informal comments were brought into that discussion as part of the continuous improvement work.

Hope this makes sense. If not, feel free to reach out.

Kind regards,
Nurani


> On 8 Apr 2019, at 23:31, Louie Lee <louie@louie.net> wrote:
>
> Hi RC Members,
>
> Attached is the slide deck for my IANA RC update presentation at the ARIN 43 meeting tomorrow. Please review for accuracy.
>
> Thanks,
> Louie
>
> P.S. Please mail me directly for access to the source file if you'd like to adapt it for presenting at other venues.
> <rc-ARIN-43.pdf>_______________________________________________
> Rc mailing list
> Rc@nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc


_______________________________________________
Rc mailing list
Rc@nro.net
https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc

<rc-ARIN-43.pdf>