All, As discussed, on a few occasions recently, a new base version of a draft proposal - V2.0 - has been prepared. The attached draft is a starting point and intended to be dynamic and evolving in a form that is: a. consistent with the ICG RFP b. able to be cross-referenced with the already submitted proposals Overall, the primary purpose of this V2.0 draft is to provide a basis from which to map and manage our future work, including providing anchor points for both commissioning and absorbing the work of the Design Teams. We hope it will also be a beneficial reference for those who are observing or tracking the work of the group Note that this draft doesn't include all of the work of the RFP III & RFP IV sub-groups. To the extent that their prior work is not included in the document, the work of these sub-groups should be seen to be valuable reference material and/or a basis for any relevant design teams. We trust this will be seen as a useful addition to the work of the group and we look forward to working with you to further develop this document. Thank-you, Lise & Jonathan
All, please use the attached version instead in which some numbering issues have been fixed (no other changes). Best regards, Marika From: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Organization: Afilias Reply-To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Date: Wednesday 25 February 2015 21:47 To: "cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Draft Proposal Version 2.0 All, As discussed, on a few occasions recently, a new base version of a draft proposal - V2.0 - has been prepared. The attached draft is a starting point and intended to be dynamic and evolving in a form that is: a. consistent with the ICG RFP b. able to be cross-referenced with the already submitted proposals Overall, the primary purpose of this V2.0 draft is to provide a basis from which to map and manage our future work, including providing anchor points for both commissioning and absorbing the work of the Design Teams. We hope it will also be a beneficial reference for those who are observing or tracking the work of the group Note that this draft doesn't include all of the work of the RFP III & RFP IV sub-groups. To the extent that their prior work is not included in the document, the work of these sub-groups should be seen to be valuable reference material and/or a basis for any relevant design teams. We trust this will be seen as a useful addition to the work of the group and we look forward to working with you to further develop this document. Thank-you, Lise & Jonathan
Jonathan, Lise: Thankyou for another draft magnum opus. As you say there are several aspects to be completed in greater detail. Meanwhile, may I point out that under: I. The Community’s Use of the IANA - and indeed in the whole document, there is no reference to the TLDs: .gov, .mil, .edu and .arpa. These are not gTLDs, as the reference to .int confirms. For the sake of completeness, it would not be appropriate to ignore them. Regards CW
From: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> Organization: Afilias Reply-To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> Date: Wednesday 25 February 2015 21:47 To: "cwg-stewardship@icann.org" <cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Draft Proposal Version 2.0
All,
As discussed, on a few occasions recently, a new base version of a draft proposal – V2.0 - has been prepared.
The attached draft is a starting point and intended to be dynamic and evolving in a form that is: a. consistent with the ICG RFP b. able to be cross-referenced with the already submitted proposals
Overall, the primary purpose of this V2.0 draft is to provide a basis from which to map and manage our future work, including providing anchor points for both commissioning and absorbing the work of the Design Teams.
We hope it will also be a beneficial reference for those who are observing or tracking the work of the group
Note that this draft doesn’t include all of the work of the RFP III & RFP IV sub-groups. To the extent that their prior work is not included in the document, the work of these sub-groups should be seen to be valuable reference material and/or a basis for any relevant design teams.
We trust this will be seen as a useful addition to the work of the group and we look forward to working with you to further develop this document.
Thank-you,
Lise & Jonathan
<CWG - Draft Transition Plan V2.0 updated.docx>_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
participants (3)
-
CW Lists -
Jonathan Robinson -
Marika Konings