[Internal-cg] Minutes for ICG Call 22

[Daniel Karrenberg]

I agree that the CCWG interdependency to be already covered sufficiently
even without an explicit explanation of the time line. Anyone can see
that our commitment to seek confirmation from CWG makes the date that we
can submit our deliverable dependent on CCWG's result. However this does
not mean we cannot finish work on our deliverable earlier than that.

As far as I am aware we have no formal knowledge that CCWG is delayed.
We should not make assumptions; thus as far as I am concerned the answer
to Q16 still stands.

Daniel



On 8.10.15 9:20 , Manal Ismail wrote:
> I'm fine with the minutes too and agree with Lynn that the sentence she quoted doesn't parse well .. 
> 
> Here are a couple of proposed edits, in Capital, subject to Keith's approval ..
> "Drazek concluded that there is uncertainty on the extent that the board's concerns WOULD REQUIRE substantial change IN the CCWG proposal that a third public comment period might be necessary.  He stated that the CCWG is still working towards Dublin for delivery of a proposal for community approval
> 
> I also noticed in the minutes that I've suggested clarifying in the FAQ the indirect interdependency between the ICG and the CCWG timelines, and that there was some agreement
> "Ismail suggested an adding this topic (and any other updates) to the ICG FAQ.
> o	Adobe Connect chat: Uduma, St. Amour, Karrenberg agreed"
> Apologies for overlooking this .. But going back to the FAQ (https://www.ianacg.org/iana-stewardship-transition-coordination-group-icg-faq/ ), I found the point already covered in Q17 & Q33 and found that last sentence in Q16 doesn't hold anymore?
> 
> Please let me know if this (or other topics) still need to be addressed by the FAQ ..
> 
> Kind Regards
> --Manal
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of Lynn St.Amour
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 4:13 AM
> To: Jennifer Chung
> Cc: internal-cg at ianacg.org
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Minutes for ICG Call 22
> 
> Hi Jennifer,
> 
> Overall, the minutes look fine.   I have only one comment re the sentence below (Section 2, para 4) as it doesn't parse well.  Keith may want to edit...
> 
> "Drazek concluded that there is uncertainty on the extent that the board's concerns substantial change the CCWG proposal that a third public comment period might be necessary.  He stated that the CCWG is still working towards Dublin for delivery of a proposal for community approval
> 
> Thanks for all the good work,
> 
> Lynn
> 
> On Sep 30, 2015, at 11:01 AM, "Jennifer Chung" <jen at icgsec.asia> wrote:
> 
>> Dear All,
>>  
>> Please find attached and linked below, the draft minutes for ICG Call 22.
>>  
>> Dropbox short link: http://icgsec.asia/1YOCZyz
>>  
>> Recording, transcripts and chat transcripts are available on the archive: http://www.ianacg.org/coordination-group/icg-archives/
>>  
>> The minutes for the F2F will be forth-coming under separate cover.
>>  
>> Please let me know if you have any questions.
>>  
>> Best Regards,
>>  
>> Jennifer
>> <minutes-teleconference-10-sept-2015-draft-v1.doc>_______________________________________________
>> 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
>