Agree absolutely! Count me in
On 7 Mar 2016 18:05, "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl@gih.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
- +1 I also support - and if I may add, I attended the session today and was very surprised that the stage was just populated by ICANN Staff. I have concerns that this kind of fumble is exactly the kind of thing that breeds lack of trust so I am pleased to see the proposal Jonathan has shared with us.
- Kindest regards,
- Olivier
- On 07/03/2016 17:09, Greg Shatan wrote:
- I support this as well.
- Greg
- On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Lindeberg, Elise <elise.lindeberg@nkom.no > wrote:
- Also in support !
- Elise
- Elise Lindeberg
- Senior Legal Adviser
- Norwegian GAC representative
- Norwegian Communications Authority
- Dir. +47 22 824607 Mob. +47 90190947
- ekl@nkom.no
- Fra: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] PÃ¥ vegne av Jian C. Chang
- Sendt: 7. mars 2016 17:06
- Til: Eduardo Diaz; jrobinson@afilias.info; cwg-stewardship
- Emne: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] IANA Stewardship Implementation
- Agree and support Jonathan's proposal.
- +1 to Mathew, not DT lead too, but will be happy to participate in the task force if necessary.
- Jian Chang
- KNET
- From: Eduardo Diaz
- Date: 2016-03-07 23:56
- To: jrobinson; cwg-stewardship
- Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] IANA Stewardship Implementation
- I do support this proposal.
- Thanks for being so attentive to these details.
- -ed
- On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:13 PM Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info > wrote:
- All,
- Lise and I today attended the session entitled:
- https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/mon-iana-stewardship-implementation
- It became clear during the course of the session that material new details on the implementation of the CWG Stewardship proposal were being released for the first time.
- This raises two issues:
- 1. Process – How do we ensure that ICANN implementation staff do not get out of synchronisation with the CWG?
- 2. Substance – Do we agree with the details presented in the session today?
- Both Lise and I stood up and made points to this effect during the meeting as did some of the CWG Stewardship Members / Participants.
- We also spoke with Akram & Trang afterwards. It does seem that this was an inadvertent oversight driven by a desire and need to make progress.
- However, it is also evident that there is a need for the ICANN staff implementation team to have more rapid or agile reference to the CWG, in addition to our bi-weekly updates / meetings.
- Therefore, in order to address this need, the co-chairs propose to form an implementation oversight task force comprising the CWG co-chairs and the DT leads. The outcomes will come back to the CWG in any case but we believe that we need a capability to track the implementation work as closely as possible and as it evolves.
- Please can we have any comments or concerns with this proposal as soon as possible.
- Thank-you,
- Lise and Jonathan
- Co-Chairs, CWG Stewardship
- _______________________________________________
- CWG-Stewardship mailing list
- CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
- https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
- _______________________________________________
- CWG-Stewardship mailing list
- CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
- https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
- CWG-Stewardship mailing list
- CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
- https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
- _______________________________________________
- CWG-Stewardship mailing list
- CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
- https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship