Nick Ashton-Hart ha scritto:
Putting my process hat on, might I suggest something like the following as a possible procedure for development and approval of Working Group output? Obviously what procedure the community agrees to is entirely up to you all, but in the interests of gaining agreement on a basic procedure here you go:
Thinking at it, I would suggest a slightly different counterproposal: in theory, the regions should already be involved in the WG, so there should be no need of two separate comment periods, one for them and then one for the ALAC. I will send the current draft to the regional lists, and solicit comments in the next ten days. Then I will incorporate them and submit a final draft to the ALAC by September 3. The ALAC would then have one week to object or release the document. At the same time, I encourage again all ALSes, RALOs, and ALAC members who are interested in reviewing the document, to join the WG mailing list at http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/raa-wg_atlarge-lists.icann.o... and review the current draft at http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/raa-wg_atlarge-lists.icann.org/atta... Ciao, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------