[Internal-cg] bylaws feedback

Sat Apr 30 14:22:41 UTC 2016

I agree w Patrik.  It is incumbent upon the ICG to flag any consequential deviations from the proposals we processed.

--MM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:paf at frobbit.se]
> Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2016 8:02 AM
> To: joseph.alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com>
> Cc: Subrenat, Jean-Jacques <jjs at dyalog.net>; Lynn St.Amour
> <Lynn at LStAmour.org>; Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>; IANA etc
> etcCoordination Group <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] bylaws feedback
> 
> On 30 Apr 2016, at 11:38, joseph.alhadeff wrote:
> 
> > I am not opposed to the positions or the concerns, I am just not seeing a
> direct linkage to our specific transition work.  Can someone clarify the
> connection/dependency?
> 
> What I see is that the implementation work is not doing what is in the
> documents produced, but something else. As if the design process did not
> stop when ICG/CCWG documents where done.
> 
>    Patrik
> 
> > Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
> >
> > -------- Original message --------
> > From: "Subrenat, Jean-Jacques" <jjs at dyalog.net>
> > Date: 4/30/2016  2:49 AM  (GMT-05:00)
> > To: Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se>
> > Cc: "Lynn St.Amour" <Lynn at LStAmour.org>, Milton L Mueller
> > <milton at gatech.edu>, IANA etc etcCoordination Group
> > <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] bylaws feedback
> >
> > Alissa,
> >
> > I support the position you advocate: the ICG can/should send a statement.
> And I'm willing to work with you, Lynn and others on that.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Jean-Jacques.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Mail original -----
> > De: "Patrik Fältström" <paf at frobbit.se>
> > À: "Lynn St.Amour" <Lynn at LStAmour.org>
> > Cc: "Milton L Mueller" <milton at gatech.edu>, "IANA etc etcCoordination
> > Group" <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> > Envoyé: Samedi 30 Avril 2016 08:26:21
> > Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] bylaws feedback
> >
> > FWIW, I personally would support such an initiative.
> >
> >    Patrik
> >
> > On 29 Apr 2016, at 19:55, Lynn St.Amour wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Alissa, Milton, all,
> >>
> >> I would like to come back to this subject.  Specifically, I would like to
> propose that the ICG send in a statement to the By-laws comment period.
> >>
> >> Alissa commented on a specific concern (see thread below) and I also
> believe the ICG should be concerned about the overreach in the draft bylaws.
> >>
> >> My main concerns are:
> >>
> >> - the fact that these draft by-laws, through the grand-fathering provisions,
> allow external agreements to define ICANN's Mission which seems like a bad
> idea for many reasons.  Further, this contradicts the desires of the community
> (or is a run around the community - intentional or not) who worked hard to
> clarify and correctly state ICANN’s mission throughout the IANA Transition
> process (paragraphs 140-144 of the CCWG-Accountability proposal).
> >>
> >> - the ICG process was fashioned to ensure that the transition plans
> reflected the consensus of the Internet community.  And, it was to respect the
> roles and responsibilities of the OCs in defining their own transition
> plans.  The ICG and the CCWG reports define those wishes, and any changes to
> the bylaws were to be to implement those wishes, nothing more.  Yet
> provisions in sections 1.1(d)(ii)(B)-(D) are outside the scope of both the ICG
> and the CCWG-Accountability proposals, and so there has not been
> appropriate community involvement or review for those changes.   Note:
> these sections affect much of the Internet community, as they apply to
> agreements between ICANN and the ASO, NRO, IETF, Root Zone Maintainer,
> and PTI.
> >>
> >> For transparency: the IAB/IETF are also concerned about the overreach and
> are drafting their own comments, and as an IAB appointee to the ICG, I am
> part of that review as well.
> >>
> >> If there is support for the ICG sending in a comment, I would be happy to
> work with Alissa and others to draft something for ICG review.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Lynn
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Apr 12, 2016, at 3:15 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> From the minutes it looks like this was discussed on the CCWG call and
> there will be follow-up.
> >>>
> >>>> On Apr 12, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I sent it yesterday but there has been no response at all.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa at cooperw.in]
> >>>>> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 4:54 PM
> >>>>> To: Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
> >>>>> Cc: IANA etc etcCoordination Group <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] bylaws feedback
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think that would be fine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Alissa
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 11, 2016, at 1:04 PM, Mueller, Milton L
> >>>>>> <milton at gatech.edu>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Alissa
> >>>>>> If you don't mind I will just forward your message to the bylaws
> >>>>>> and CWG
> >>>>> lists.
> >>>>>> If there is some other way you want me to do this, please let me know.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --MM
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>> From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On
> >>>>>>> Behalf Of Alissa Cooper
> >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 1:49 PM
> >>>>>>> To: IANA etc etcCoordination Group <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> >>>>>>> Subject: [Internal-cg] bylaws feedback
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I have looked a bit at the draft bylaws and I’d like to ask
> >>>>>>> Kavouss and Milton to bring the following issue back to the bylaws
> drafting group:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Section 1.1(d)(ii) incorporates by reference a number of
> >>>>>>> documents external to the bylaws as a means to prevent
> >>>>>>> challenges on the basis that those documents conflict with or
> >>>>>>> violate the bylaws. In particular, bullet (D) applies this
> >>>>>>> provision to "the IANA Naming Function Contract between ICANN
> and PTI effective [October 1, 2016]."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Given the ICG's historical encouragement of the community to
> >>>>>>> meet timelines necessary for a successful transition, I find
> >>>>>>> this provision to be extremely problematic. It incorporates a
> >>>>>>> reference to a document that does not exist yet and that is
> >>>>>>> unlikely to be completed by the time the bylaws are supposed to
> >>>>>>> be done (early June). In fact, it is not even clear at this
> >>>>>>> point whether the new ICANN affiliate to be setup will be name
> >>>>>>> "PTI" or have some other name. I don't understand how anyone can
> >>>>>>> reason about whether
> >>>>>>> 1.1(d)(ii) is an acceptable bylaws provision if it references a
> >>>>>>> document that has not been written. (This also applies to (B)
> >>>>>>> and (C) since it could apply to future documents that haven’t
> >>>>>>> been written
> >>>>>>> yet.)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Furthermore, I question whether it is a sound decision to
> >>>>>>> essentially allow for documents external to the bylaws to be
> >>>>>>> able to modify the bylaws (under (F)). This section would make
> >>>>>>> more sense if it was entirely internally specified, without the
> >>>>>>> references to external documents. At a minimum, I think we
> >>>>>>> should recommend that (D) be
> >>>>> removed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Alissa
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> 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