My preference is to not add that for the following reasons: - it is indeed a valid question, but it is a result of the insertion of the GNSO Liaison into the equation, which is out main point of contention - and why the GNSO Council itself is even the focus. - I am a bit worried that they may address your point and ignore the main one - it is FAR easier to address than putting back some sort of DFG. Let's discuss further. Alan At 2021-01-19 12:01 PM, Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi wrote:
Thanks Alan for the statement, I had a comment in relation to the flow chart on the last page of the concept paper. The flow chart indicates a direct path of communication between the GNSO council and the ODP team other than the GNSO Council Liaison/Liaisons to the ODP group. More clarification is required in relation to this other means of communication between the ODP team and the GNSO council and if you have some other direct means of communication between the council and the ODP team why do you need a Liaison?
Hadia
-----Original Message----- From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 6:45 PM To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: [CPWG] Statement on ODP Concept Paper v2.0
At the last CPWG, I was asked to draft a statement on the Operational Design Phase Concept Paper (v2.0).
The draft statement is now posted to the wiki (https://community.icann.org/x/qgNACQ) and is attached here for your convenience.
The deadline for submission is Friday, 22 January 2021.
Alan