[Internal-cg] Thoughts on proposal assessments

Thu Jul 23 17:16:35 UTC 2015

Dear Wolf-Ulrich and all of you have expressed an interest,

You are certainly welcome to visit the office in Playa Vista, California on
Thursday Sept 17th.  Other than seeing where we work and introductions to
individuals in the department, it is unclear whether that is worth the trip
to our office.  The hotel where the ICG meeting will take place is about 30
minutes by car from our office (that is what Google maps indicates).

Also, Keith Davidson has already planned a working meeting with us to
discuss the ccNSO FOI for Thursday afternoon, and we would have to
coordinate the visit to not conflict with this previously scheduled meeting.

Do let me know if you are still interested in visiting the ICANN office in
Playa Vista, and we will work to find a time that is mutually convenient.

See you all at the ICG meeting in Los Angeles in September,
-- Elise 

From:  WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
Reply-To:  WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
Date:  Wednesday, July 22, 2015 at 5:15 PM
To:  Elise Gerich <elise.gerich at icann.org>, "kuoweiwu at gmail.com"
<kuoweiwu at gmail.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in>
Cc:  "internal-cg at ianacg.org" <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
Subject:  Re: [Internal-cg] Thoughts on proposal assessments

> Dear Elise, all,
>  
> as my travel for the ICG September meeting in LA has now been arranged thanks
> to ICANN travel department I’m thinking how to make best use of the time
> available. My wish is to grab the chance and visit the IANA department – in an
> individual capacity.
> My arrival shall be 12:40 on Thursday Sep 17. There would be time in the
> afternoon for the visit. If it could be arranged in a non-official way I'd
> really appreciate. Maybe other ICG colleagues are interested and find time to
> join.
> Best regards
> 
> Wolf-Ulrich
>  
> From: Elise Gerich <mailto:elise.gerich at icann.org>
> Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 2:44 AM
> To: WUKnoben <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>  ; kuoweiwu at gmail.com ;
> Alissa Cooper <mailto:alissa at cooperw.in>
> Cc: internal-cg at ianacg.org
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Thoughts on proposal assessments
>  
> Wolf-Ulrich,
> We are following the assessment of the various proposals and are curious as to
> what the final impact will be on our current operational structure and the
> interdependencies of the functions.
> -- Elise 
>  
>  
> From: WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
> Reply-To: WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
> Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 2:21 AM
> To: "kuoweiwu at gmail.com" <kuoweiwu at gmail.com>, Alissa Cooper
> <alissa at cooperw.in>
> Cc: "internal-cg at ianacg.org" <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Thoughts on proposal assessments
>  
>> Kuo-Wei,
>>  
>> I'm glad you raising this point. I've already raised my finger several times
>> in various meetings - including the CSG meeting with the board in BA - in
>> order not to forget the people in the present and future IANA organisation.
>> They are the ones who ensure continuous operational excellence which is
>> crucial with regards to the security, stability and resiliency of the
>> system - one of the basic NTIA requirements.
>> Career plan of staff is one element between others.
>> I would encourage to outreach at an appropriate time. Maybe Elise as staff
>> liaison could gide us.
>>  
>> Best regards
>>  
>> Wolf-Ulrich
>>  
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> From: Wu Kuo-Wei
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2015 4:45 PM
>> To: Alissa Cooper
>> Cc: ICG Coordination Group
>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Thoughts on proposal assessments
>>  
>> If I may, I like to speak in my personal capacity. If you don’t agree the
>> liaison’s position proper to say anything, you can drop my comment.
>>  
>>> Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in> 於 2015年7月8日 06:35 寫道：
>>>  
>>> Thank you to everyone who did a names proposal assessment. I wrote down a
>>> few thoughts in preparation for our discussion on July 8.
>>>  
>>> Both Alan and the names folks (Wolf-Ulrich, Mary, Keith, and Martin) point
>>> out that there are areas where more detail will be developed as part of
>>> implementation (service levels, IANA budget, PTI budget, etc.). It would
>>> be helpful for us to have the definitive list of these for our reference.
>>> Is that list somewhere in the proposal (or supporting material)?
>>  
>> It could be part of implementation. But as name proposal, it try to separate
>> the policy and operator to establish PTI. We might need to get some input
>> from IANA people who will be moved to PTI as name proposal (as the long term
>> stability issue of PTI). It is critical for such design working well for the
>> career development for IANA people in the long run. At the current status,
>> IANA people can move to other department of ICANN for better career plan,
>> and receiving reasonable promotion. We (ICG and ICANN) might need to learn
>> IANA people, not just treat them as “box”. We decide their future, but
>> ignore their voice. So I will suggest to add this into the list other than
>> SLA, budget,..).
>>  
>> Again, if you don’t agree the liaison position proper to say, please drop my
>> comment.
>>  
>> Thanks.
>>  
>> Kuo Wu
>>  
>>>  
>>> Alan, Russ Housley and Russ Mundy point out that the proposal cannot be
>>> considered complete since it is dependent on outputs from the CCWG. My
>>> question: does that prevent us in the ICG from moving forward with public
>>> comment and proposal finalization while we await the output of the CCWG?
>>> My personal view is that it does not but I wanted to check.
>>>  
>>> Russ Mundy raises a good question about the Root Zone Maintainer’s
>>> relationship to the IFO and I look forward to our discussion of that. I
>>> note that the SSAC made a similar comment to the CWG in its approval of
>>> the proposal. Again I don’t think this is necessarily blocking on our
>>> work, but it might be a detail where we need to seek clarification.
>>>  
>>> Alissa
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Internal-cg mailing list
>>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>>  
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>>  
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/attachments/20150723/df4935ef/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5037 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/attachments/20150723/df4935ef/attachment.p7s>