Dear Jordan, Dear Co Chairs Dear All, I think one public comment is not sufficient , Why for such an important issue only one period is forseen unless we are of the strong view that one dialogue between CCWG and the entire community is enough,in particular, for WS2 as the scope , nature and extent of that stream is too complex . We need to revisit this item again. Regards Kavouss 2015-03-22 16:57 GMT+01:00 Jordan Carter <jordan@internetnz.net.nz>:

It's important to be clear that the current schedule proposes:

ONE public comment period for WorkStream 1 matters (pre-transition)

ONE public comment period for WorkStream 2 matters (post-transition)

It remains to be seen whether it is possible to construct our pre-transition proposal based on one comment period - hopefully this will be clear by Tuesday afternoon.

bests Jordan

On 22 March 2015 at 17:51, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi Kavouss,

According to the timeline, there seem to be two 40 days public comments planned for the ccwg.

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20150129/c9bfee6e/ICG-...

Regards

sent from Google nexus 4 kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 22 Mar 2015 13:27, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Dear All, May somebody kindly mention how many public comments are foreseen and what are the period(s) deadline for comments It is important that atleast two public comments to be foreseen each with atleast 21 days response period KAVOUSS

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- Jordan Carter

Chief Executive *InternetNZ*

04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter

*A better world through a better Internet *

Hi Robin, all I don't think the current timeline proposes 20days. It proposes 40days public comment and another 21days period for SO/AC(the chartering organisations). Perhaps having the 40 days divided in phases could help. However I think the other 21days is also sufficient enough to get more comments in after the initial update. Regards sent from Google nexus 4 kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 22 Mar 2015 17:29, "Robin Gross" <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:

I agree with Kavouss. I think it would be terribly irresponsible of us to make the kind of reforms we need for WS1 with only one single 20-day comment period. There are significant impacts to these measures that must be explored by the community before we could possibly undertake them. We are redesigning a global governance institution and need to take the time to do it right, which includes community consultation and an iterative process of reaching recommendations. This cannot be achieved without a reply or 2nd comment period to take the public comments on board. Nor can it be done before we have independent legal advice that the community can weigh and consider. These are complex issues with significant implications for many stakeholders - more significant than anything ICANN has done in a decade.

Larry Strickling has said several times that 30 Sept is not a deadline and that the IANA contract would be extended while the community takes the necessary time to get the important issues right.

Thanks, Robin

On Mar 22, 2015, at 9:13 AM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:

Dear Jordan, Dear Co Chairs Dear All, I think one public comment is not sufficient , Why for such an important issue only one period is forseen unless we are of the strong view that one dialogue between CCWG and the entire community is enough,in particular, for WS2 as the scope , nature and extent of that stream is too complex . We need to revisit this item again. Regards Kavouss

2015-03-22 16:57 GMT+01:00 Jordan Carter <jordan@internetnz.net.nz>:

...

It's important to be clear that the current schedule proposes:

ONE public comment period for WorkStream 1 matters (pre-transition)

ONE public comment period for WorkStream 2 matters (post-transition)

It remains to be seen whether it is possible to construct our pre-transition proposal based on one comment period - hopefully this will be clear by Tuesday afternoon.

bests Jordan

On 22 March 2015 at 17:51, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi Kavouss,

According to the timeline, there seem to be two 40 days public comments planned for the ccwg.

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20150129/c9bfee6e/ICG-...

Regards

sent from Google nexus 4 kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 22 Mar 2015 13:27, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Dear All, May somebody kindly mention how many public comments are foreseen and what are the period(s) deadline for comments It is important that atleast two public comments to be foreseen each with atleast 21 days response period KAVOUSS

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- Jordan Carter

Chief Executive *InternetNZ*

04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter

*A better world through a better Internet *

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

Actually, i believe that ICANN just recently shifted from the two-part comment period (21 day initial comment & 21 day reply comment) to a single 40-day comment period. Greg On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com> wrote:

+1. Larry Strickling has stated that the community has only one chance to get this right. In addition, not only is September 30th not a deadline but NTIA has acknowledged that it is subject to the appropriations rider enacted in December which prohibits the transition taking place by September 30th.

A two part comment period (initial comment followed by reply) is now standard for much less important issues addressed by the ICANN community, so that certainly should be the minimum expected for a permanent new accountability framework. A full comment period will also facilitate the detailed fine-tuning that will improve the overall proposal, build community support, and thereby substantially reduce the likelihood of any future actions by Congress to forestall the transition.

*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*

*Virtualaw LLC*

*1155 F Street, NW*

*Suite 1050*

*Washington, DC 20004*

*202-559-8597 <202-559-8597>/Direct*

*202-559-8750 <202-559-8750>/Fax*

*202-255-6172 <202-255-6172>/cell*

*Twitter: @VlawDC*

*"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey*

*From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Robin Gross *Sent:* Sunday, March 22, 2015 12:27 PM *To:* Kavouss Arasteh *Cc:* Accountability Cross Community *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Public Comments

I agree with Kavouss. I think it would be terribly irresponsible of us to make the kind of reforms we need for WS1 with only one single 20-day comment period. There are significant impacts to these measures that must be explored by the community before we could possibly undertake them. We are redesigning a global governance institution and need to take the time to do it right, which includes community consultation and an iterative process of reaching recommendations. This cannot be achieved without a reply or 2nd comment period to take the public comments on board. Nor can it be done before we have independent legal advice that the community can weigh and consider. These are complex issues with significant implications for many stakeholders - more significant than anything ICANN has done in a decade.

Larry Strickling has said several times that 30 Sept is not a deadline and that the IANA contract would be extended while the community takes the necessary time to get the important issues right.

Thanks,

Robin

On Mar 22, 2015, at 9:13 AM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:

Dear Jordan,

Dear Co Chairs

Dear All,

I think one public comment is not sufficient , Why for such an important issue only one period is forseen unless we are of the strong view that one dialogue between CCWG and the entire community is enough,in particular, for WS2 as the scope , nature and extent of that stream is too complex .

We need to revisit this item again.

Regards

Kavouss

2015-03-22 16:57 GMT+01:00 Jordan Carter <jordan@internetnz.net.nz>:

It's important to be clear that the current schedule proposes:

ONE public comment period for WorkStream 1 matters (pre-transition)

ONE public comment period for WorkStream 2 matters (post-transition)

It remains to be seen whether it is possible to construct our pre-transition proposal based on one comment period - hopefully this will be clear by Tuesday afternoon.

bests

Jordan

On 22 March 2015 at 17:51, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Kavouss,

According to the timeline, there seem to be two 40 days public comments planned for the ccwg.

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20150129/c9bfee6e/ICG-...

Regards

sent from Google nexus 4 kindly excuse brevity and typos.

On 22 Mar 2015 13:27, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear All,

May somebody kindly mention how many public comments are foreseen and what are the period(s) deadline for comments

It is important that atleast two public comments to be foreseen each with atleast 21 days response period

KAVOUSS

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

--

Jordan Carter

Chief Executive *InternetNZ*

04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter

*A better world through a better Internet *

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

------------------------------

No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5751 / Virus Database: 4306/9294 - Release Date: 03/13/15 Internal Virus Database is out of date.

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

I agree with Kavouss about WS2 (post transition); there is need to have enough time for that. However I think having definite timing for WS1 is quite important. While September 30 should not be a reason to rush, at the same time I believe it could at least serve as a deadline for WS1. It's important to note that the longer the duration does not necessarily mean it will produce better outcome (it most likely will produce outcome with views from fewer number of contributors). The momentum is there right now and the world is following. If the ccwg cannot produce at least some outcome on WS 1 by/before September (which is a whole year), then one may question the capabilities of multistakeholder platforms. I hope the co-chairs will be sensitive of the fact that not everyone is interested in seeing this multistakeholder based process succeed in a timely manner. Regards sent from Google nexus 4 kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 22 Mar 2015 17:13, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Jordan, Dear Co Chairs Dear All, I think one public comment is not sufficient , Why for such an important issue only one period is forseen unless we are of the strong view that one dialogue between CCWG and the entire community is enough,in particular, for WS2 as the scope , nature and extent of that stream is too complex . We need to revisit this item again. Regards Kavouss

2015-03-22 16:57 GMT+01:00 Jordan Carter <jordan@internetnz.net.nz>:

...

It's important to be clear that the current schedule proposes:

ONE public comment period for WorkStream 1 matters (pre-transition)

ONE public comment period for WorkStream 2 matters (post-transition)

It remains to be seen whether it is possible to construct our pre-transition proposal based on one comment period - hopefully this will be clear by Tuesday afternoon.

bests Jordan

On 22 March 2015 at 17:51, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi Kavouss,

According to the timeline, there seem to be two 40 days public comments planned for the ccwg.

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20150129/c9bfee6e/ICG-...

Regards

sent from Google nexus 4 kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 22 Mar 2015 13:27, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Dear All, May somebody kindly mention how many public comments are foreseen and what are the period(s) deadline for comments It is important that atleast two public comments to be foreseen each with atleast 21 days response period KAVOUSS

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- Jordan Carter

Chief Executive *InternetNZ*

04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter

*A better world through a better Internet *