[Internal-cg] Continuing / Re-Chartering Thoughts

Subrenat, Jean-Jacques jjs at dyalog.net
Sun Oct 18 12:58:12 UTC 2015


Narelle,

You say "I'm not convinced what we wrote is fully in line with what the community expected". I'm not so sure, because *we* are the representatives of our communities, so if any of them had an issue with the Charter, they should have said so, either in a public statement, or through their representative(s) in the ICG.

But I agree with the thrust of your email, we can take the initiative of approaching our communities (not only OCs, by the way) in question- rather than affirmation-mode. The wording will be important.

Jean-Jacques.






----- Mail original -----
De: "Narelle Clark" <narelle.clark at accan.org.au>
À: "Daniel Karrenberg" <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net>, "IANA etc etc Coordination Group" <Internal-cg at ianacg.org>
Envoyé: Dimanche 18 Octobre 2015 12:34:07
Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Continuing / Re-Chartering Thoughts


Daniel
*We* established our charter with a view that this was going to be a more smooth transition than it is turning out to be. I'm not convinced what we wrote is fully in line with what the community expected.

There is an argument that says people expect this group (the ICG) to take a more prominent role in transition. To deny this is more that we haven't stepped up to the community expectations rather than it not being what we were asked to do.

This group is a highly regarded group representative of the community as a whole. It has a significant level of trust and esteem. The community is looking to it to provide some shepherding of this proposal - or more specifically IANA - into its next phase. I doubt there is another group with the background, expertise and respect that could do it.

But don't get me wrong. I'm *not* saying we should decide right now "unilaterally" (your word) to take on responsibility for the implementation, or even some form of project management, or issue tracking. I *am* saying we need to get instructions from the community about what they need and who they want to do it.
 
The best way to get instructions is to ask for them.

I would have thought the public forum was an excellent place to pose that question and Alissa framed it beautifully in our meeting today.


Narelle

-----Original Message-----
From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Karrenberg
Sent: Sunday, 18 October 2015 7:31 PM
To: IANA etc etc Coordination Group
Subject: [Internal-cg] Continuing / Re-Chartering Thoughts


Let me take the role of arguing against group-think. It may help that I am not in Dublin at this time. ;-)

I understand that some want us to stay around to keep everyone, specifically ICANN, honest during implementation.

Our current charter does not cover this. This requires a re-charter.
Something like "Regularly compile information about the state of the transition and report it to the Internet community."

We should not change the charter on our own initiative. If we do that our credibility will be that of self-appointed vigilantes. Even formally asking "How can we help further?" looks pathetic to me and it certainly would weaken our credibility going forward.

Therefore I propose that we should just publish the proposal and say that we are done and will hibernate until we get the OK to submit it and answer possible questions about it.

In response to our statement the OCs and others could ask us on their own initiative to do something in addition like "Regularly compile information about the state of the transition and report it to the Internet community." The OCs might even offer material support for this additional work to fund part of the secretariat and/or travel. If that were to occur we would very likely agree to do that and our mandate and credibility doing this would be very very strong.

If the OCs actually manage to ask us to do this as a group or with coordinated language it would be strong evidence of their ability to coordinate.

Would this be a way forward?

Daniel

PS: While I am on it may I also suggest that we ask all three OCs whether it is OK to submit the proposal and not just the CWG. The optics of that look much better to me personally.









_______________________________________________
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



More information about the Internal-cg mailing list