[Internal-cg] Contracting

Fri May 1 09:48:03 UTC 2015

Dear Subrenat,
Thank you very much for your useful and valid viesws
When you say , "WE"whom you referring ?
ÏCG"?
I do not belieive that we ICG as a collegial body have been given any
mandate to take any action in this regard unless OCs referred the complaint
in question to us within the process of IANA transition process.
Once we formally received any complaint and found that it merely relates to
IABNA TRANSITION and not existing procedure between ICANN and OCs ,then we
could examine the care and findout whether we need to take any action in
that regard
Once again if it relates to CWG SECOND DRAFT WHICH IS ON PUBLIC COMMENT ,WE
SHALL NOT INTERVENE AS WE HAVE NOT FORMALLY RECEIVED ANY THING FROM CWG.
We are not spokemen of IETF nor RIREs
Regards
KAVOUSS

2015-05-01 11:30 GMT+02:00 Subrenat, Jean-Jacques <jjs at dyalog.net>:

> Dear Patrik,
>
> I support your position, and Alissa's initiative, as a proper and timely
> defense of principles. Having been on the ICANN Board, and seen forces at
> play, I must say that awareness can never be too high about the risk of
> capture by various interests, generally to the detriment of the global
> Internet user.
>
> Best regards,
> Jean-Jacques.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "Patrik Fältström" <paf at frobbit.se>
> À: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com>
> Cc: internal-cg at ianacg.org
> Envoyé: Vendredi 1 Mai 2015 09:43:28
> Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Contracting
>
> Let me state explicitly that Alissa and I have talked about this and as
> co-chair of ICG I feel I am required to point out publicly (again) that
> _everyone_ must use the processes the OCs define for bottom-up
> multistakeholder participation.
>
> If someone, specifically ICANN I must say, is not using the process
> defined by the OC, I feel I will later on have issues to defend whatever
> ICG will deliver to NTIA.
>
> So when I say I support a message from us, I do this as a co-chair of ICG
> and not only as an individual participating.
>
> What I wrote earlier on was a clarification that ICANN staff might not
> understand that they MUST participate in the OC processes because normally
> they are forbidden to participate in the PDPs running in the various OCs.
>
>    Patrik Fältström
>    ICG co-chair
>
> On 30 Apr 2015, at 19:17, James M. Bladel wrote:
>
> > Agree, with Milton, and disagree with Kavous¹ description of the intent
> of
> > Alissa¹s actions.
> >
> > ICANN Staff (possibly without approval or awareness of their Board?) is
> > intervening in the proposal process in an non-transparent and un-deinfed
> > manner.  It is perfectly appropriate for the ICG to respond as Alissa has
> > indicated, and in fact it is our responsibility to do so.
> >
> > Please note that her statement reinforces the process of submitting
> > feedback, without regard to the substance of those discussions.
> >
> > Thanks‹
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/30/15, 11:45 , "Milton L Mueller" <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> My understanding of the consensus process is that one cannot simply
> >> object, one must have viable reasons to object.
> >> In my view, Kavouss has not advanced a single substantive reason for his
> >> resistance.
> >>
> >> I look forward to a meaningful explanation from Kavouss, something more
> >> than a joke about "international court of justice", something that takes
> >> account of the process concerns that have been voiced by Alissa, myself,
> >> others. I must insist that we do not have such an explanation yet,
> >> Kavouss, and it is your responsibility to provide one if you expect me
> to
> >> take your objections seriously.
> >>
> >> --MM
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa at cooperw.in]
> >>> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 11:03 AM
> >>> To: Kavouss Arasteh
> >>> Cc: Milton L Mueller; internal-cg at ianacg.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Contracting
> >>>
> >>> Hi Kavouss,
> >>>
> >>> Your objection to issuing an ICG statement about
> >>> contracts/agreements is noted.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Alissa
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 30, 2015, at 3:19 AM, Kavouss Arasteh
> >>> <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Alussa
> >>>> It seems that
> >>>> ICG becoming the I international  Court of Justice.
> >>>> Wgat us the natter that we becoming of OCs
> >>>> Pls clarify and  this time No Note to be issued until every body
> >>> agreed
> >>>> I an very disappointed by your previous action that the consensus
> >>>> tules were breached openly Pls be careful and nit to do it again Best
> >>>> regards Kavouss
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 29 Apr 2015, at 17:41, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Good statement. I support it as is.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> ICG Statement on Contracts and Other Agreements
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As the development of the proposal for the IANA stewardship
> >>>>>> transition proceeds, operational communities have begun
> >>> discussions
> >>>>>> with ICANN concerning contracts and other agreements called for
> >>> in
> >>>>>> their community transition proposals. The ICG expects -- as it has
> >>>>>> from the very beginning of the transition process -- that all
> >>>>>> interested parties, including ICANN staff, express their opinions
> >>>>>> about the transition proposals openly and transparently within the
> >>>>>> community processes. This includes opinions about the provisions,
> >>>>>> principles, and mechanisms associated with contracts or other
> >>>>>> agreements between the communities and the IANA functions
> >>> operator.
> >>>>>> Attempts to alter or deviate from the community consensus
> >>> proposals
> >>>>>> through private negotiations undermine the legitimacy of the
> >>>>>> transition proposal development process. At a time when all of
> >>> the
> >>>>>> communities are focused on accountability, all parties have the
> >>> same
> >>>>>> obligation to carry out discussions in an open manner within
> >>>>>> established community processes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Apr 26, 2015, at 1:33 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The thread below as well as the following paragraph in Milton¹s
> >>>>>> memo raised a question for me:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ³... negotiations between CRISP and ICANN legal raise a very
> >>>>>> important process issue. As ICG we have viewed ourselves as an
> >>>>>> entity that receives consensus proposals from the operational
> >>>>>> communities and does not try to alter them. Shouldn¹t we expect
> >>> the
> >>>>>> same from ICANN? If ICANN legal is attempting to make major
> >>>>>> alterations in the terms of the contractual rights exercised by an
> >>>>>> operational community as part of the transition, isn¹t it
> >>>>>> interfering with the consensus proposal of the affected
> >>> operational
> >>>>>> community? There is also the fact that these negotiations are
> >>> going
> >>>>>> on behind the scenes and are not transparent to the whole
> >>> involved community.²
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> My understanding is that the IETF folks are encountering some of
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>> same things as CRISP. Do we think it would help if the ICG put out
> >>> a
> >>>>>> statement of some sort indicating that we continue to expect all
> >>>>>> interested parties, including ICANN staff, to express their opinions
> >>>>>> about the transition proposals openly and transparently within the
> >>>>>> community processes? And that includes opinions about the
> >>>>>> acceptability of principles and mechanisms associated with
> >>>>>> contractual arrangements between the communities and the
> >>> IANA
> >>>>>> functions operator?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Alissa
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Apr 24, 2015, at 5:34 AM, Lynn St.Amour
> >>> <Lynn at LStAmour.org>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Milton,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> A big +1 to "Let me also remind us that this is a bottom up
> >>>>>>>> process
> >>>>>> and ICG has no business modifying or rejecting proposals based on
> >>>>>> what it thinks NTIA wants.  NTIA¹s criteria are public us and they
> >>>>>> do _not_ include any thing about splitting the IANA functions."
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Lynn
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Apr 23, 2015, at 10:15 AM, Milton L Mueller
> >>> <mueller at syr.edu>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi, reading these notes, I see this from Keith:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ³NTIA suggests that anything which threatens to split the IANA
> >>>>>> functions would be difficult for them to accept - so the idea that
> >>>>>> Protocols, Numbers or Names would have independent right of
> >>> contract
> >>>>>> termination maybe troublesome to NTIA ?²
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I was not there for the full context, of course, so I may be
> >>>>>> misinterpreting, but on its face this is incorrect, in my opinion. I
> >>>>>> would like to know from Keith when and where NTIA suggested
> >>> this.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Let¹s keep in mind that IETF already has the right to ³split² or
> >>>>>> terminate its MoU with ICANN and has had that right for 15 years
> >>>>>> through various iterations of the IANA contract. CRISP has
> >>> proposed
> >>>>>> something similar.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Let me also remind us that this is a bottom up process and ICG
> >>>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>> no business modifying or rejecting proposals based on what it
> >>> thinks
> >>>>>> NTIA wants. NTIA¹s criteria are public us and they do _not_ include
> >>>>>> any thing about splitting the IANA functions.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --MM
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On
> >>>>>> Behalf Of Jennifer Chung
> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 12:10 PM
> >>>>>>>>> To: internal-cg at ianacg.org
> >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG Call #15: Attendance list and
> >>> Chat
> >>>>>> Transcript
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Apologies, the attachment was missing to the last email.
> >>>>>>>>> Attached
> >>>>>> please find the chat transcript for ICG Call 15.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Jennifer
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> From: Jennifer Chung [mailto:jen at icgsec.asia]
> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 12:09 PM
> >>>>>>>>> To: 'internal-cg at ianacg.org'
> >>>>>>>>> Subject: ICG Call #15: Attendance list and Chat Transcript
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Dear All,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Please find the chat transcript (attached) and the attendance
> >>>>>>>>> roll
> >>>>>> call (below) for Call 15.  Please let me know if you note any
> >>>>>> discrepancies:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ICG Members
> >>>>>>>>> Kavouss Arasteh (GAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Paul Wilson (NRO)
> >>>>>>>>> Daniel Karrenberg (RSSAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Keith Davidson (ccNSO)
> >>>>>>>>> Alissa Cooper (IETF)
> >>>>>>>>> Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Jari Arkko (IETF)
> >>>>>>>>> Martin Boyle (ccNSO)
> >>>>>>>>> Demi Getschko (ISOC)
> >>>>>>>>> Jandyr Ferreira dos Santos (GAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Keith Drazek (gTLD Registries)
> >>>>>>>>> Jon Nevett (gTLD Registries)
> >>>>>>>>> Lynn St. Amour (IAB)
> >>>>>>>>> Michael Niebel (GAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Narelle Clark (ISOC)
> >>>>>>>>> Russ Housley (IAB)
> >>>>>>>>> Russ Mundy (SSAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (GNSO)
> >>>>>>>>> Xiaodong Lee (ccNSO)
> >>>>>>>>> Alan Barrett (NRO)
> >>>>>>>>> Lars-Johan Liman (RSSAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Joseph Alhadeff (ICC/BASIS)
> >>>>>>>>> Mary Uduma (ccNSO)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Liaisons
> >>>>>>>>> Elise Gerich (IANA Staff Liaison)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Apologies
> >>>>>>>>> Kuo Wei Wu (ICANN Board Liaison)
> >>>>>>>>> James Bladel (GNSO)
> >>>>>>>>> Milton Mueller (GNSO)
> >>>>>>>>> Hartmut Glaser (ASO)
> >>>>>>>>> Manal Ismail (GAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Mohamed El Bashir (ALAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Patrik Fältström (SSAC)
> >>>>>>>>> Thomas Schneider (GAC)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Jennifer
> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>> 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
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150501/62772a97/attachment.html>