+1 however the ICG should start thinking of how they are gonna work around developing a single functional oversight proposal. Cheers! On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> wrote:
Actually I don’t think it would be anything but a distraction at this point. What this group needs to do is develop a proposal based on the ICG RFP. I am conversant with what is happening in the protocol parameters community and could liaise with them, but it is hard for me to see how a ‘horizontal channel’ to that would help you develop a proposal. Of course, if, during the development of a proposal, specific questions arise about its compatibility with the protocol parameters IANA or the numbers IANA, then we can reach out to them. But for now, you just need to develop a proposal regarding the DNS root and the end of NTIA’s role in overseeing that.
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:33 AM *To:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* [CWG-Stewardship] Communication with numbers and protocol parameters groups
All:
Are there people in this group who are in a position to liaise with, coordinate with and/or provide information to and from the other two groups preparing responses for their respective communities?
I think opening a "horizontal" channel would be most helpful in our work.
Greg Shatan
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* The key to understanding is humility - my view !