[Community-Discuss] Call for Comments on a Revision to the RSA

[Alan Barrett]

> On 2 Oct 2017, at 15:29, Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl> wrote:
> Just a quick comment on the wording. The notes say:
> 
>> - The new 6(d)(vii) says that a transfer is a kind of allocation or assignment. Because of this, other parts of the RSA that refer to allocations or assignments will automatically cover transfers as well.
> 
> That seems fine. However section 1(c)(i) says:
> 
>> - “Services” may include, without limitation, an allocation/assignment or transfer of number resources.
> 
> Depending on how someone wants to read it, that might be interpreted in a way that sets a precedent that says that transfers are not included in "allocation/assignment" by default and need to be mentioned explicitly.
> 
> I know, I'm picking nits here, but for consistency and to avoid misinterpretations I think it would be better to either not mention "or transfers" here, or to explicitly include them in other places as well.

Thanks.  I think we may be able to move the idea that a transfer is a kind of allocation or assignment to the definitions in 1(c), instead of a separate clause in 6(d)(viii).

Alan Barrett

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20171002/20b8c89b/attachment.sig>