[Internal-cg] FW: CWG proposal preassessment
Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk
Wed Apr 22 15:40:27 UTC 2015
I think Wolf-Ulrich is exactly right – we should be using the period of the consultation to ask any questions that we have, in particular to clarify how the names proposal will interface with the other proposals. Indeed, as a Coordination Group, I would see ensuring coherence between the proposals as an important role best not left until we try to fit the elements together. (It is also a job where Milton has been active, working in the three different groups I believe.)
So thanks Wolf-Ulrich for proposing this.
From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of Jennifer Chung
Sent: 22 April 2015 16:16
To: internal-cg at ianacg.org
Subject: [Internal-cg] FW: CWG proposal preassessment
Please see Wolf-Ulrich’s email below.
From: WUKnoben<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 4:26 PM
To: internal-cg at icann.org<mailto:internal-cg at icann.org>
Subject: CWG proposal preassessment
in the chat of the ICG call today I made a suggestion that we shouldn't just wait until the CWG provides us with their proposal formally. Rather than we could take the version going on public comment for a preliminary assessment. I think this would be of advantage first with respect to the amount of work to be done in the future by ICG and secondly with respect to potential iterations between CWG and ICG.
If this approach can find ICG approval I’m prepared to volunteer together with other colleagues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg