Andrew, Are you suggesting that the transition happen without revised SLEs? Chuck -----Original Message----- From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 12:04 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] SLE update - ICANN seeks to delay SLE Accountability reporting...... On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 03:42:33PM +0000, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
Andrew If I am not mistaken, this is a settled issue. Did this group decide to revise the SLE or did it not? I am under the impression that it did. It undermines the process when people try to use snafus to reinsert a non-consensus position into the outcome.
I'm not trying to insert anything. My reading of Annex H is that the text says that the plan is part of implementation and is running in parallel. Therefore, if it takes a few more months, it's not the end of the world; and we can proceed with the transition without it being completely sorted. What am I misreading? A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship