[Internal-cg] Preface for the combined proposal

[Wolf-Ulrich Knoben]

 Thanks Kavouss,

please see my comments inserted (in blue)

Best regards

Wolf-Ulrich


 *From:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
*Sent:* Saturday, June 06, 2015 5:57 PM
*To:* WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
*Cc:* internal-cg at ianacg.org
*Subject:* Re: [Internal-cg] Preface for the combined proposal

 WOLF

We need to properly understand the objectives of your proposal

If I understand the matter as soon as the final DARFT is ready we will call
for public comments (first public comments). We could consider the
introductory part of the First CWG and/or Second CWG call for public
comments  or that of  the First CCWG and/or Second CCWG call for public
comments ( which will be soon available ).However ,such introductory parts
for the above Cross Community Groups were complemented by ICANN in its
official announcement for public comment

My question then is why we need to get involved in this formality apart
from  few short paragraphs which describes the actions being taken which
are already summarized in our Charter.



I didn’t refer to the CWG nor the CCWG call for public comments. I think we
should develop our own introductory part for the upcoming ICG call for
public comments. But this introductory part should be different from the
preface  of the final proposal to be sent to the NTIA. The details of the
different items should be discussed. I’m of the opinion that the
explanation of IANA and the related business – which was suggested by
Milton to become a point within the preface – should just be used in the
introductory part for the upcoming ICG public comment.



Before proceeding further ,we need to finalize the purpose and usefulness
of such work taking into account that we need to be careful that we we may
prepare would not have any inconsistency with that which would normally be
prepared by ICANN.

Fully agreed.

Regards

Kavouss

2015-06-06 14:16 GMT+02:00 WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>:

>   I think there are two "recipients" of the proposal we have to take into
> consideration at the time being: the "public comment community" and NTIA. I
> here suppose that NTIA knows what IANA is and does. Consequently there
> should be slightly different intros for the two purposes - or a separate
> intro for the public comment period on top of the preface.
> In this separate intro I'd place Miltons suggestion to explain what IANA
> is *and does *(the latter seems to me more important).
>
> The points for the preface itself as suggested by Alissa plus an
> explanation of the rationale and motivation behind the overall proposal
> (Milton) look good. I just wonder – but I’m not yet sure – whether
> something should be written with regards to the work of the
> CCWG-accountability and how their input is taken.
>
> Best regards
>
> Wolf-Ulrich
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> From: Milton L Mueller
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 3:56 AM
> To: Alissa Cooper ; internal-cg at ianacg.org
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Preface for the combined proposal
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > What points are important to make in the preface? Off the top of my
> head, I
> > would say we need at the very least:
> > - High-level summary of the proposal
>
> I think it's important to provide an overview that explains the rationale
> and motivation behind the overall proposal. Not sure how we can do this
> until we have the final proposal, however.
>
> One thing I have learned from the process is that many people still don't
> quite understand that IANA is a collection of registries, and they may not
> understand how related or unrelated the names, numbers and protocol
> registries are. This should be explained. Ths overview might also include
> references to RFC 7500 as well as some of the general principles adopted by
> the names and numbers communities in developing their proposals, as well as
> a discussion of how we see the relationship between the IANA functions for
> the 3 communities under the PTI model and a discussion of how each
> community is handling the issue of contracting or "separability."
>
> > - High-level summary of the process used to produce the proposal - both
> > the community processes and our process
>
> This is of secondary importance, in my opinion. Yes, a short summary of
> the process used is needed. What really matters here, however, is whether
> the final proposal has achieved the "broad community support" required by
> the NTIA criteria, which is part of the next item...
>
> > - Our assessment of how/why the proposal meets the NTIA criteria
>
> Very important. Take each criterion in turn. Here again it would, I think,
> be inappropriate to start working on this until we actually have the final
> proposal. Of course we can describe how the numbers and protocol proposals
> meet the criteria but we are not entirely sure yet whether they might be
> slightly modified in reponse to what the names proposal does.
>
> > I'm willing to write a first draft of the preface but would like a few
> volunteers
> > to form a small editing team before we bring it back to the full ICG.
> Who is
> > willing to volunteer? (Jean-Jacques, can I assume you are?)
>
> Willing to volunteer but advance warning that I will be unable to do much
> in the July 15 - 24 time frame.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150607/6ccc5b03/attachment.html>