Thank you, Susannah.
Nurani – I support the approval of these minutes without a meeting.
-Richard Jimmerson
Hi Nurani, all,
Please find attached an updated version (0.3) of the minutes.
This version contains the text replacement outlined by Jason in point 2 below.
Once approved, I'll upload to the website.
Kind regards,
Susannah
On 07/04/2019 22:33, Nurani Nimpuno wrote:
Dear IANA RC members,
I understand from Jason that this satisfies his concerns.
As our next IANA RC meeting is not until the end of the year, I suggest we move to approve these minutes on the mailing list.
Could I ask you all to please review the minutes and unless you have any further modifications or correction, support an approval of these minutes?
Hi Jason,
Apologise for the slow response on this.
1. I don’t have a suggested change for the first one, but would like to draw your attention the follow notes, and provide my impression of what this note is missing. Hopefully someone with a more clear recollection can suggest a specific change.
“NN continued that the RIR staff and the NRO Secretariat should consider this comment. The report was published on the NRO website and there might be accessibility considerations that need to be taken into account or there might need to be changes in the way the report was displayed on the website.”
It is my impression that the flavor of this comment was in light of this work being out of the RC’s scope, and that it should really fall to the RIRs and/or the NRO to address accessibility (being it is on their sight, and that it may require commitment of resources well above what a handful of volunteers can offer). I don’t get that impression from the notes.
Can someone confirm if this matches their recollection, and if so maybe suggest an edit?
Indeed, that is what I was suggesting, as most of the accessibility considerations really apply more to the website and how the report is made available. But I feel that the paragraph in the minutes convey that.
“JS noted that the RC had just agreed to change its Operating Procedures. The previous text made it sound it like the community was aware that there was an open comment period and that the comments would be collected and reviewed. The new procedures now note that the RC is only interested in feedback from the community that is relevant to the IANA number services operations.”
“JS noted that the RC had just agreed to change its Operating Procedures. The previous text made it sound it like the RC’s responsibility was to simply make sure that community was aware that there was an open comment period and that the comments would be collected and reviewed.
The new procedures now narrows the scope, noting that the RC is only interested in feedback from the community that is relevant to the IANA number services operations, but otherwise generally opens the responsibility, clarifying that the RC should be continuously engaged with the community.”
Wrt publishing the minutes, personally I would be comfortable publishing final or draft minutes given there has been sufficient discussion (or at least a large number of members saying sounds good to me) on list and no one objects.
Taking into consideration your suggested amendment, I am satisfied with the minutes from the last RC meeting.
Anyone care to suggest a specific edit on my first point (or at least chime in and let me know if your recollection differs or supports my recollection)?
Dear RC
I'm attaching minutes from last week teleconference for your review.
Given that the next IANA RC teleconference is scheduled for the last quarter of the year, it would be possible to seek for an approval of this minutes on the list instead of waiting some months before his publication ? or are you ok to publish this minutes as draft ?
Regards
German
_______________________________________________
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
--
Susannah Gray
NRO Secretariat Support
www.nro.net