Hello, Thanks Alan for this draft. As I am in a place where the Internet cnx is very poor, I can¹t really use Wiki for those comment. I will try to give you my comments here. - TO ADD - (to remove) Lines 28/30 the ALAC would - STRONGLY - prefer to accept (the) - A - compromise Line 106 this - TYPE OF - compromise. Lines 143/146 I don¹t think we want to push to a possible separation from ICANN. It is where we risk to loose the multistakeholder model all in one. If we have to go to this construct, I would like to suggest that the PTI Board be either: - the full ICANN Board - a subset of the ICANN Board (if the IANA Board committee would have been still in function it would have been a good candidate). Thanks All the best Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com> Le 19/05/2015 07:08, « Alan Greenberg » <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> a écrit :
The first draft of the proposed comment on the CWG report has been posted.
The full set of community comments and the draft can be found at https://community.icann.org/x/XConAw. The PDF version of the draft comment is also attached to this e-mail.
The deadline for submission is tomorrow, Wednesday, 20 May, and the ALAC will be ratifying the submission after-the-fact.
If you have not yet looked at the draft comment, please do, as there is little time left to provide feedback.
Alan_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A LAC)