[Internal-cg] "Implementation"

Drazek, Keith kdrazek at verisign.com
Wed May 20 17:23:44 UTC 2015

Thanks James. 

The CCWG Accountability Co-Chairs received their own version of the same letter from NTIA, so I expect they'll be responding directly. 


-----Original Message-----
From: James M. Bladel [mailto:jbladel at godaddy.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 1:22 PM
To: Drazek, Keith; Alissa Cooper; internal-cg at ianacg.org
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] "Implementation"

Agree with Keith¹s edits.

Where do we see CCWG-Accountabilty fitting in on this?  As a part of our request to Names?  The implementation timeline associated with this group¹s work could be the longest and therefore become the critical path.



On 5/20/15, 9:50 , "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek at verisign.com> wrote:

>Hi Alissa, I think this looks good with two suggested edits in CAPS 
>below. I think we need to include both (a) completion of proposal 
>development, and (b) implementation. At least for the Naming CWG. 
>NTIA's request included transition planning and associated 
>timeframes...including finalization and implementation.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of 
>Alissa Cooper
>Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 12:32 PM
>To: internal-cg at ianacg.org
>Subject: [Internal-cg] "Implementation"
>On the call yesterday we said we needed further discussion about what 
>it means for the transition proposals to be "implemented" before we can 
>go out to the operational communities and gather input about 
>implementation time frames. Here is the relevant excerpt from the letter from Larry:
>"I ask that the community provide us with an update on the status of 
>the transition planning and the associated timeframes, including the 
>community's views as to how long it will take to finalize the 
>transition plan and implement it after it is approved. We request that 
>you and the three primary customer working groups provide us with your 
>views before the end of June, which will give you the opportunity to 
>discuss these issues with the multistakeholder community at the June 
>ICANN meeting in Argentina. In providing this feedback, please keep in 
>mind that the United States Government will need sufficient time to 
>evaluate the proposal and that all work items identified either by the 
>ICG and the CCWG-Accountability as prerequisites for the transition 
>will need to be implemented prior to the ending of the contract."
>Re-reading this, I think the question we as community reps need to go 
>ask the communities is something along the following lines:
>"The ICG is gathering input about how much time the operational 
>communities believe they will need to COMPLETE PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT AND 
>implement the aspects of the transition proposal that the communities 
>have identified as needing to be completed prior to the expiry of the 
>NTIA contract (e.g., creation of new contracts, agreements, or entities).
>From start to finish, approximately how many weeks or months do you 
>think your community will need to complete the COMPLETE PROPOSAL 
>DEVELOPMENT AND implementation of these aspects?"
>This makes it clear that the focus is specifically on what the 
>communities have decided about what needs to get done prior to the NTIA 
>contract expiry versus what may be done later, and also that the extent 
>to which those things need to be "done" should be defined by the 
>Internal-cg mailing list
>Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>Internal-cg mailing list
>Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list