[Internal-cg] transition proposal v5

Wu Kuo-Wei kuoweiwu at gmail.com
Thu Oct 22 09:09:56 UTC 2015 

It is very welcome if ICG request.

Kuo Wu

> Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net> 於 2015年10月22日 16:57 寫道：
> 
> Maybe ICG should formally ask the board?
> 
> On 22.10.15 10:49 , joseph alhadeff wrote:
>> Kuo:
>> 
>> In our earlier discussions, hadn't it been agreed that ICANN Board would
>> actively participate in the comment and evaluation process? While we
>> would not expect a formal sign off, an indication that the Board was
>> comfortable with the proposal in its current state would be useful in
>> clarifying that our work is nearly done.
>> 
>> Joe
>> 
>> On 10/22/2015 3:05 AM, Wu Kuo-Wei wrote:
>>> I love to. We discuss it, but not all the members agree since waiting
>>> for CWG confirmation.
>>> 
>>> Kuo Wu
>>> 
>>>> Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net> 於 2015年10月22日
>>>> 15:02 寫道：
>>>> 
>>>> Kuo,
>>>> 
>>>> personally I hope that the ICANN board would take note of the ICG
>>>> proposal once we are finished with this final editing round even before
>>>> we are able to formally submit it. It would be unfortunate if the ICANN
>>>> board would decide to add comments that weaken the proposal when it is
>>>> transmitted to NTIA, especially comments that could be addressed by
>>>> ICG/OCs  already now while we wait for CWG confirmation.
>>>> 
>>>> My personal thoughts
>>>> 
>>>> Daniel
>>>> 
>>>> On 22.10.15 8:34 , Wu Kuo-Wei wrote:
>>>>> Alissa and all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> ICANN board didn’t start to generate position yet since the final
>>>>> proposal didn’t deliver to us yet. But we do talk about the IETF/RIRs
>>>>> contract might transfer to PTI. We understand it. This is not the major
>>>>> concern for us at this moment. We know the proposals from IANAPLAN and
>>>>> CRISP better because they deliver earlier and almost no change (only
>>>>> the
>>>>> SLA details need to discuss) since then.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Kuo Wu
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in <mailto:alissa at cooperw.in>> 於 2015年
>>>>>> 10月22日 14:16 寫道：
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Elise,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We have had multiple confirmations from the other two communities that
>>>>>> this approach is acceptable to them, in the public comments and
>>>>>> elsewhere. It isn’t documented in the OC proposals because they were
>>>>>> submitted before the PTI concept was invented.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Alissa
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Oct 22, 2015, at 6:23 AM, Elise Gerich <elise.gerich at icann.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:elise.gerich at icann.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In paragraph X009 the version of the executive summary in Russ’ email
>>>>>>> states:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> “Under the combined transition proposal the administrative staff and
>>>>>>>> related resources, processes, data, and know-how associated with all
>>>>>>>> of the IANA functions currently covered by the NTIA contract would
>>>>>>>> be legally transferred to PTI.  ICANN would contract with the PTI
>>>>>>>> for the performance of the naming functions."
>>>>>>> Did I miss something in the protocol parameters’ and numbers’
>>>>>>> communities proposals?  From my reading of their proposals as well as
>>>>>>> the summary in paragraphs X007 and X008, neither of those communities
>>>>>>> proposed that the administrative staff, etc. would be legally
>>>>>>> transferred to PTI.  I agree this is a pragmatic implementation
>>>>>>> approach, it is  just that I do not see that approach documented in
>>>>>>> the numbers and protocol parameters proposals.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Is this an ICG interpretation of what should happen rather than what
>>>>>>> is specified in the two individual proposals?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -- Elise
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> From: Internal-cg <internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org>> on behalf of Russ Mundy
>>>>>>> <mundy at tislabs.com <mailto:mundy at tislabs.com>>
>>>>>>> Date: Thursday, October 22, 2015 at 1:26 AM
>>>>>>> To: "internal-cg at ianacg.org <mailto:internal-cg at ianacg.org>"
>>>>>>> <internal-cg at ianacg.org <mailto:internal-cg at ianacg.org>>
>>>>>>> Cc: Russ Mundy <mundy at tislabs.com <mailto:mundy at tislabs.com>>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] transition proposal v5
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I’ve also carefully read the executive summary and the (relatively)
>>>>>>>> new History of IANA section (para’s 02-06).
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I like the changes Daniel suggestions to the exec summary and don’t
>>>>>>>> have any further changes to suggest.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> In the History section, I’ve made several readability changes in
>>>>>>>> paragraphs 04 & 05 that I think make them clearer. If others
>>>>>>>> disagree with the changes, I’m not wedded to these words so they can
>>>>>>>> be further improved or reverted if the group would prefers.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I did spot one small factual error in the History section that I
>>>>>>>> think I’ve corrected, i.e., the contract that was awarded in 2000 is
>>>>>>>> not the one being replaced by this transition, rather, it is the
>>>>>>>> contract that was awarded 2 Jul 2012 - I think that adding “a
>>>>>>>> subsequent” to line 9 of 04 corrects the error.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I’ve placed a version titled:
>>>>>>>> IANA-transition-proposal-v5-karrenberg-mundy.docx in Dropbox.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> RussM
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2015, at 12:08 PM, Daniel Karrenberg
>>>>>>>> <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net <mailto:daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Signed PGP part
>>>>>>>>> I have read the executive summary carefully and suggest two minor
>>>>>>>>> edits dropping text. If they are not easily agreed, drop them and
>>>>>>>>> move o
>>>>>>>>> n.
>>>>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/home/CoordinationGroup/Combined%20Proposal?previ
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> ew=IANA-transition-proposal-v5-karrenberg.docx
>>>>>>>>> I also suggest a *major* edit to the final paragraphs, the "ICG
>>>>>>>>> Recommendations." This is the most important part of the executive
>>>>>>>>> summary and need to be a strong and clear statement. I believe we
>>>>>>>>> deserve better than we have now and suggest we say just this:
>>>>>>>>> X031The ICG unanimously supports this proposal and recommends to
>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>> parties to implement it.
>>>>>>>>> X032The ICG will transmit this proposal to the ICANN board for
>>>>>>>>> submission to NTIA as soon as the CWG has confirmed that its
>>>>>>>>> requirements regarding ICANN accountability have been met..
>>>>>>>>> Daniel
>>>>>>>>> On 20.10.15 23:28 , Patrik Fältström wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I walked through the History Section to clean up the language a
>>>>>>>>>> bit.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The -v5 now has red-line that marks my changes.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> paf
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 20 Oct 2015, at 17:07, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Updated proposal attached. Dropbox:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/pjchlea1b0ammd0/IANA-transition-proposal-v5
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> .docx?dl=0
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.dropbox.com/s/pjchlea1b0ammd0/IANA-transition-proposal-v
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 5.docx?dl=0>
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Edits made:
>>>>>>>>>>> - Deleted mentions of public comments from exec summary (except
>>>>>>>>>>> the two people wanted to retain) - Edited and aligned all
>>>>>>>>>>> references to CCWG dependency (per email thread started by
>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel) - Added history section starting with paragraph 02 (per
>>>>>>>>>>> Patrik) - Updated Figure 4 pie chart to reflect correct
>>>>>>>>>>> statistics (per Lynn) - Edited implementation bullet item
>>>>>>>>>>> related to issue resolution mechanisms (per Martin)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Alissa
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ Internal-cg
>>>>>>>>>>> mailing list Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list