Discussions on ALAC Positions on CCWG Recommendations
One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list. Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list. The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance. Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so. Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list. We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech. Alan
I agree with your point of view. I don't have any objection about it. I believe that this proposed action will enrich the discussion process. Greetings El 3 de febrero de 2016 15:27:38 GMT-04:30, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> escribió:
One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list.
Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list.
The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance.
Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so.
Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list.
We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech.
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+(ALA...)
-- Enviado desde mi teléfono con K-9 Mail.
Dear Alan, fully agree with the approach and have no problems with being added to that list. Siranush From: harold.arcos@gmail.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 16:11:40 -0430 To: alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca; alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [ALAC] Discussions on ALAC Positions on CCWG Recommendations I agree with your point of view. I don't have any objection about it. I believe that this proposed action will enrich the discussion process. Greetings El 3 de febrero de 2016 15:27:38 GMT-04:30, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> escribió: One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list. Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list. The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance. Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so. Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list. We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech. 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+(ALA...) -- Enviado desde mi teléfono con K-9 Mail. _______________________________________________ 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+(ALA...)
+1 Best Sandra (Note: This message was sent from my iPhone - I do apologise for any misspelling.)
Am 04.02.2016 um 01:33 schrieb Siranush Vardanyan <siranush_vardanyan@hotmail.com>:
Dear Alan, fully agree with the approach and have no problems with being added to that list.
Siranush
From: harold.arcos@gmail.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 16:11:40 -0430 To: alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca; alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [ALAC] Discussions on ALAC Positions on CCWG Recommendations
I agree with your point of view. I don't have any objection about it. I believe that this proposed action will enrich the discussion process.
Greetings
El 3 de febrero de 2016 15:27:38 GMT-04:30, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> escribió: One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list.
Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list.
The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance.
Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so.
Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list.
We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech.
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+(ALA...)
-- Enviado desde mi teléfono con K-9 Mail. _______________________________________________ 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+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ 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+(ALA...)
I see no problem! Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. On 2/3/16, 5:57 PM, "alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Alan Greenberg" <alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list.
Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list.
The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance.
Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so.
Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list.
We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech.
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+(ALA...)
Makes a lot of sense to me so no objections here Holly On 4 Feb 2016, at 6:57 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list.
Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list.
The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance.
Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so.
Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list.
We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech.
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+(ALA...)
Fine for me too. - Kaili ----- Original Message ----- From: "Holly Raiche" <h.raiche@internode.on.net> To: "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Cc: "ALAC" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] Discussions on ALAC Positions on CCWG Recommendations
Makes a lot of sense to me so no objections here
Holly On 4 Feb 2016, at 6:57 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list.
Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list.
The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance.
Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so.
Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list.
We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech.
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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ 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+(ALA...)
I support adding them, Alan. Best regards, León
El 03/02/2016, a las 7:01 p.m., Kan Kaili <kankaili@gmail.com> escribió:
Fine for me too. - Kaili
----- Original Message ----- From: "Holly Raiche" <h.raiche@internode.on.net> To: "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Cc: "ALAC" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [ALAC] Discussions on ALAC Positions on CCWG Recommendations
Makes a lot of sense to me so no objections here
Holly On 4 Feb 2016, at 6:57 am, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list.
Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list.
The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance.
Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so.
Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list.
We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech.
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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ 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+(ALA...)
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+(ALA...)
+1 Cheers! On 3 Feb 2016 9:00 p.m., "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
One of the problems we have had is that when commenting on previous CCWG reports, there have been two parallel discussions, one on the ALAC list, and one on the IANA-Issues WG list.
Currently about 1/2 of the ALAC and 9 regional leaders are not on the IANA-Issues list.
The traffic on that list is low. In January, there were 42 messages, and 32 of those were related to meeting schedules, with only 10 on substance.
Adding someone to the list makes it easier for them to attend a WG meeting, but does not imply any obligation to do so.
Is there any objection if we add those people to the IANA-Issues list now? This would allow the important discussion on whether to ratify or not on a single list.
We could remove those who wanted to leave once the final decision is taken in or before Marrakech.
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+(ALA...)
participants (9)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Harold -
Holly Raiche -
Kan Kaili -
León Felipe Sánchez Ambía -
sandra hoferichter -
Seun Ojedeji -
Siranush Vardanyan -
Vanda Scartezini