Hi Ernesto,
Thank you for accepting my suggested clarification and sending out the new version.
I see in the matrix saying that the 2019 Review Committee Assessment is that the SLA was met 100% against 4 criteria. While the RC may indeed determines it to be so, is it premature to publish publicly that we, as a group, have already come to that conclusion prior to the RC's own report? Or perhaps this assessment comes from the RC members having seen the monthly reports coming out and have been satisfied that the SLA was met each time. Indeed, Nurani has noted to the RC each time IANA's reports come out that the SLA has been met, so maybe I'm just calling attention to something that doesn't actually matter.
On the special allocation of IPv6 address to RIPE NCC, since the matrix details the interaction, is the RC to understand that the interaction was performed under the SLA? Assuming yes, I've updated the online draft to reflect it. I'm seeking confirmation.
Hope everyone is having a great weekend.
Louie
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 3:26 PM Ernesto Majó ernesto@lacnic.net wrote:
Hi again,
Please, disregard the previous file.
I`ve updated the report in order to clarify the information of timestamp not available.
(Thanks Louie)
Regards
Ernesto
El 31/1/20 a las 15:06, Ernesto Majó escribió:
Colleagues,
I am sending the RIR summary report for your consideration. According with the request made during our last conference, we simplify it and try to reproduce the way that IANA publish its reports.
The information was verifyed by the staff from all RIRs.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Warm regards Ernesto
Rc mailing listRc@nro.nethttps://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc
Rc mailing list Rc@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc