And now I / we have received this.

Thoughts or is it essentially the same point we discussed already?

It may be that we simply work with the open (ICG) forum on Thursday

Jonathan

From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa@cooperw.in]
Sent: 24 September 2014 01:11
To: jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com; ocl@gih.com; byron.holland@cira.ca
Cc: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben; Milton Mueller; Martin Boyle; Keith Davidson; bart.boswinkel@icann.org
Subject: CWG-ICG meeting at ICANN 51

Jonathan, Byron, Olivier,

In the IANA stewardship coordination group (ICG), we’ve been discussing the possibility of having side meetings between a subset of ICG members and other constituencies that will be in attendance at ICANN 51. I’m writing to you to see if you would be interested in organizing such a meeting with the CWG working on developing a transition proposal.

Our goal with these meetings is to inform people about how they can become involved in transition proposal development (not just for names, but for the other functions as well), to encourage people to attend an open forum that the ICG is hosting on Thursday of ICANN week, and to answer questions. We have a few conditions we’ve set for all such meetings — that they be public, minuted, and, if possible, translated.

Is this something you would be interested in organizing, as part of your already-scheduled meeting time or otherwise? If not, do you think separate ICG meetings with the GNSO and/or ccNSO would make sense?

Thanks,

Alissa