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

Thank you, Nurani. Your timeline sounds good. I must say though, Ernesto was the one who added the RIR matrix in the draft report. He even managed to create the links in the matrix to point to different parts within the document.

Once the matrix has been published and the RIRs have made their announcements of the 30 day comment period, then the draft report can be updated with the links to these announcements. After that I will circulate the new version of the draft report on the mailing list in the other email thread.

Louie

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 6:01 AM Nurani Nimpuno nurani@nimblebits.net wrote:

Hi all,

Thank you for circulating the new RIR Matrix, Ernesto. And thank you Louie for including it in the draft report.

I believe the RIRs have concluded that the IPv6 allocation made to the RIPE NCC as fulfilled under the SLA, which is why it was included in the RIR Matrix. But I ask the RIRs to please confirm this so as to avoid any confusion.

As we allowed for some additional time for the RIRs to work on the format, I propose a slightly modified time plan for the completion of the report.

Unless there are further comments or modifications needed to the RIR matrix, I suggest that the secretariat publishes the RIR matrix tomorrow, 4 February on the NRO website.

I will write an announcement to announce the 30 day public comment period which I will ask the RIRs to distribute on their respective community lists.

*Proposed 2020 work plan* 31 Jan - RIR Matrix for internal circulation 4 Feb - Chair sends public announcement of RIR matrix (Starts 30 day comment period)

• Drafting of report

4 Feb - 5 - March Monitoring of feedback

*RC Meeting 2 (Mar)* - Doodle 2 - 6 March

• Finalising report

(At the end of 30 day comment period)

*7 - 12 Mar*- Publication of final report (unless complications arise)

*RC Meeting 3 (Mar) *Placeholder meeting Doodle: 16 - 27 Mar

• Close any unresolved issues before publishing final report
• Publish final report (If not completed already)

*RC Meeting 4 (Mar/Apr)*- Post-Mortem

• Suggestions for improvements for next year

*RC Meeting 5 (Nov/Dec)*- Preparation for 2020 report Doodle to be sent out in Oct/November (NRO secretariat)

Kind regards,

Nurani

On 2 Feb 2020, at 04:39, Louie Lee louie@louie.net wrote:

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

Nurani, all looks good to me. Thanks.

From: rc-bounces@nro.net on behalf of Nurani Nimpuno nurani@nimblebits.net Date: Monday, February 3, 2020 at 9:01 AM To: IANA Numbering Services Review Committee rc@nro.net Cc: Louis Lee louie@louie.net Subject: Re: [IANA-RC] 2019 RIR IANA summary report

Hi all,

Thank you for circulating the new RIR Matrix, Ernesto. And thank you Louie for including it in the draft report.

I believe the RIRs have concluded that the IPv6 allocation made to the RIPE NCC as fulfilled under the SLA, which is why it was included in the RIR Matrix. But I ask the RIRs to please confirm this so as to avoid any confusion.

As we allowed for some additional time for the RIRs to work on the format, I propose a slightly modified time plan for the completion of the report.

Unless there are further comments or modifications needed to the RIR matrix, I suggest that the secretariat publishes the RIR matrix tomorrow, 4 February on the NRO website.

I will write an announcement to announce the 30 day public comment period which I will ask the RIRs to distribute on their respective community lists.

Proposed 2020 work plan 31 Jan - RIR Matrix for internal circulation 4 Feb - Chair sends public announcement of RIR matrix (Starts 30 day comment period) - Drafting of report 4 Feb - 5 - March Monitoring of feedback

RC Meeting 2 (Mar) - Doodle 2 - 6 March - Finalising report (At the end of 30 day comment period)

7 - 12 Mar - Publication of final report (unless complications arise)

RC Meeting 3 (Mar) Placeholder meeting Doodle: 16 - 27 Mar - Close any unresolved issues before publishing final report - Publish final report (If not completed already)

RC Meeting 4 (Mar/Apr) - Post-Mortem - Suggestions for improvements for next year

RC Meeting 5 (Nov/Dec) - Preparation for 2020 report Doodle to be sent out in Oct/November (NRO secretariat)

Kind regards,

Nurani

On 2 Feb 2020, at 04:39, Louie Lee <louie@louie.netmailto:louie@louie.net> wrote:

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

Thank you for confirming this Ernesto.

That means we can move forward and ask the NRO secretariat to publish the matrix.

I will send out the announcement of the public comment period to the RIRs that should be distributed on the respective regional RIR lists.

Kind regards, Nurani

On 4 Feb 2020, at 13:57, Ernesto Majó ernesto@lacnic.net wrote:

Hi Nurani,

El 3/2/20 a las 11:01, Nurani Nimpuno escribió:

...

I believe the RIRs have concluded that the IPv6 allocation made to the RIPE NCC as fulfilled under the SLA, which is why it was included in the RIR Matrix. But I ask the RIRs to please confirm this so as to avoid any confusion.

This is right. The conclusion was that this interaction was fulfilled under the SLA.

Regards

Ernesto