[Internal-cg] Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] Update on Timeline for Chartering Org Approval of WS1 Recommendations
joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com
Thu Feb 4 13:25:58 UTC 2016
I'm fine with scheduling a call when you guys feel we are best
positioned to have the answer of CWG. That being said, I'm not sure
what if any deliberation is needed if CWG says that their dependencies
On 2/4/2016 2:12 AM, Narelle Clark wrote:
> The ICG certainly does not want to be the source of any delay.
> I thought we were going to schedule a call for both before and after
> Then cancel or keep as applies.
> *From:*Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Alissa Cooper
> *Sent:* Thursday, 4 February 2016 7:48 AM
> *To:* IANA etc etcCoordination Group
> *Subject:* [Internal-cg] Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] Update on Timeline for
> Chartering Org Approval of WS1 Recommendations
> Please take a look at the message below from the CCWG list as well as
> the formal statement from the co-chairs here:
> The CCWG is aiming to have its proposal ready for the chartering
> organizations to approve it before or during ICANN 55. In light of
> this, Mohamed, Patrik and I believe the ICG needs to do the following:
> (1) Plan to ask the CWG for confirmation that their requirements are
> met as soon as the CCWG proposal goes to the chartering orgs, and give
> the CWG a heads-up that we intend to do that so they can respond promptly.
> (2) Schedule an ICG call for March 1. Hopefully we will have heard
> back from the CWG by then and we can discuss approval of our final
> proposal then, but it will be before anyone is in transit to
> Marrakesh. We do not have to wait for the chartering orgs to finish
> our business. If the timeline slips, we can cancel this call when it
> gets closer to the date. (Alternatively we could confirm approval of
> our final proposal strictly via email, but I am assuming folks would
> prefer to do so on a call.)
> I would also like to ask the group to reconsider the idea of
> scheduling a conference call at the end of the ICANN week, if we can
> find a time with interpreter availability. If the CCWG timeline does
> slip a bit such that we have not yet gotten a response from the CWG by
> March 1, I do not want the ICG to be in a position of causing any
> additional delay. If we schedule a call at the end of the ICANN week
> to discuss approval of our final proposal, we have less risk of doing
> that. Otherwise it may get bumped to the week following ICANN 55, even
> if the CCWG proposal gets forwarded to the ICANN Board during the
> meeting. I firmly believe that every single day matters at this point.
> Your thoughts on all of the above are much appreciated.
> Begin forwarded message:
> *From: *Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
> <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>
> *Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] TR: Update on Timeline for Chartering Org
> Approval of WS1 Recommendations*
> *Date: *February 2, 2016 at 11:53:16 PM PST
> *To: *"CCWG Accountability" <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Dear Colleagues,
> Please find below for your information the note sent today to the
> Chartering Organization chairs, in line with our discussions during
> our meeting #82.
> This will be added to our correspondence section of the wiki.
> *De :*Mathieu Weill [mailto:weill at afnic.fr]
> *Envoyé :*mercredi 3 février 2016 08:52
> *À :*'James Bladel'; 'Byron Holland'; 'Louis Lee'; 'Alan Greenberg';
> 'Thomas Schneider'; 'Lars-Johan Liman'; 'Tripti Sinha'; 'Patrik
> Fältström'; 'Alissa Cooper'; 'Mohamed El Bashir'; 'Jonathan Robinson';
> 'Lise Fuhr'
> *Cc :*'David Olive'; 'Steve Crocker'; 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'Theresa
> Swinehart'; 'Thomas Rickert'; 'León Felipe Sánchez Ambía'; 'ACCT-STAFF'
> *Objet :*Update on Timeline for Chartering Org Approval of WS1
> Dear all,
> Yesterday, the co-Chairs issued aformal statement
> the community on the status of the Work Stream 1 Recommendations and
> providing insight into the steps the CCWG-Accountability will be
> taking in developing the supplemental draft.
> Our hope is that the majority of changes from the Third Draft Report
> will relate to specificities of implementation rather than content,
> and as such, an additional public comment period will not be necessary
> before approval by the Chartering Organizations.
> In light of progress made and in assessing the outstanding issues, we
> have announced a target to distribute the supplemental report to our
> Chartering Organizations in time for consideration and approval on all
> Work Stream 1 Recommendations during ICANN55 in Marrakech.
> The various SOs and ACs approach their work and schedules differently
> and we are respectfully asking that you take this into account as you
> plan your discussions before and during ICANN55.
> With that said, we encourage any Chartering Organizations that can
> deliberate and/or approve the Work Stream 1 Recommendations prior to
> Marrakech to please do so.
> We are grateful for your input on the Third Draft Report and for your
> continued engagement in the development of the revised Work Stream 1
> Recommendations. We hope to continue this open dialogue as the
> supplemental report is finalized, and we are also hoping that all
> potential issues have been raised to the CCWG-Accountability so they
> can be mitigated in our revisions. Our objective is to provide the
> Chartering Organizations a simple and straightforward approval process.
> Following approval from the Chartering Organizations, we have asked
> the ICANN Board to be mindful of the timeline as they plan their
> review period of the Work Stream 1 Recommendations and submission to NTIA.
> We have seen increased involvement from the ICANN Board as our work
> progressed since the Third Draft Report. By enabling us to understand
> Board comments in real-time, the following potential global public
> interest concerns stemming from the Board’s comments in December, have
> been discussed:
> * Inspection rights have been fully addressed.
> * Budget process concerns have been fully addressed.
> * Work Stream 2 concerns have been fully addressed.
> * Human rights concerns have been discussed and the group has
> adjusted its recommendation, however Board concerns still exist.
> * Concerns on ICANN’s Mission are still being discussed.
> As always, please not hesitate to reach out to us should you have any
> questions or concerns.
> Best regards,
> Mathieu, Thomas, León
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg