October 2014 - Internal-cg - lists.icann.org

Links to SSAC Documents
by Patrik Fältström Feb. 6, 2015

Feb. 6, 2015

SAC-067 in English: <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-067-en.pdf> SAC-068 in English: <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-068-en.pdf> Translations of those will be added shortly, and I (and/or Russ) will let you know when they arrive. Patrik

2 2

Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 ..
by mnuduma Nov. 4, 2014

Nov. 4, 2014

+1. Mary Uduma Sent from Samsung Mobile -------- Original message -------- From: Milton L Mueller <mueller(a)syr.edu> Date: 27/10/2014 01:06 (GMT+09:00) To: Joseph Alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff(a)oracle.com>,paf@frobbit.se,elise.gerich@icann.org,manal@tra.gov.eg Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 .. I think the best way to say this - simplest and most accurate - is just to delete the word board and say "ICANN is represented on the ICG by two liaisons...." Making a distinction between the board and a IANA liaison is pointless detail that may confuse ordinary readers more than it clarifies. > -----Original Message----- > From: internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:internal-cg- > bounces(a)icann.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alhadeff > Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 2:30 PM > To: paf(a)frobbit.se; elise.gerich(a)icann.org; manal(a)tra.gov.eg > Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until > 23Oct14 .. > > We really don't need any more detail than that... > > Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com) > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Manal Ismail [manal(a)tra.gov.eg] > Received: Saturday, 25 Oct 2014, 2:24PM > To: Patrik Fältström [paf(a)frobbit.se] Elise Gerich [elise.gerich(a)icann.org] > CC: internal-cg(a)icann.org [internal-cg(a)icann.org] > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until > 23Oct14 .. > > Thanks Elise, Hartmut and Patrik .. > > > > I had the same understanding too and have reflected this in earlier versions > .. Yet I changed the text based on the latest draft shared by Jandyr on behalf > of the small drafting group (himself, Lynn & Xiaodong), which I recall was > also supported by Jean-Jacques and Milton .. > > But I see your point and am happy to revert back to the earlier text, which > stated: > > “The Board is represented on the ICG by one liaison. In addition, there is a > liaison to the ICG from the IANA Department. Both liaisons are there to > provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the Board and ICG > informed about the implications of the transition.” > > > > Is this ok? Should I also add the names ? > > > > Kind Regards > > --Manal > > > > From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:paf@frobbit.se] > Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 6:06 PM > To: Elise Gerich > Cc: Manal Ismail; internal-cg(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until > 23Oct14 .. > > > > I support this. > > > > Patrik > > > > On 25 okt 2014, at 17:13, Elise Gerich <elise.gerich(a)icann.org> > wrote: > > > > Dear Manal, > > > > I thought the discussion on list had indicated that it is more accurate > to say, ICANN is represented on the ICG by two liaisons rather than The > Board is represented on the ICG by two liaisons. Kuo-Wei Wu is the Boards > liaison to the ICG, and my role is a liaison from the ICANNs IANA department. > My participation on the committee is not as a representative of the ICANN > Board. > > > > Best regards, > > -- Elise > > > > > > From: Manal Ismail <manal(a)tra.gov.eg <mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg> > > > Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 at 11:48 PM > To: "internal-cg(a)icann.org <mailto:internal-cg@icann.org> " > <internal-cg(a)icann.org <mailto:internal-cg@icann.org> > > Subject: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until > 23Oct14 .. > > > > Dear all .. > > Please find attached, and in Dropbox, a new version of ICG > FAQ reflecting the latest views and comments shared .. I have also attached > below the final compilation of answers to Q#15 & Q#16 for your convenience > .. Kindly note that I took the liberty to change "ICG proposal" or "ICG's > proposal" to "proposal submitted by the ICG", to avoid being misunderstood > as attributing the community's proposal solely to the ICG .. Hope this is ok > with everyone .. > > Happy to receive any further remarks or comments .. > > Kind Regards > > --Manal > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > 15. What is the role of the ICANN Board in preparing the > proposal? > > The ICG is independent of the ICANN Board. The Board is > represented on the ICG by two liaisons (Mrs. Elise Gerich, IANA Staff Expert; > and Mr. Kuo-Wei Wu, ICANN Board Liaison), who are there to provide > information about the IANA functions and to keep the Board and the ICG > informed about the implications of the transition. Like any other member of > the community, the ICANN Board can submit comments through the > established procedures for public comment. Consistent with U.S. federal > government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal > submitted to it by the ICANN Board, but the Board does not have community > approval to modify the proposal submitted by the ICG. When the ICG > submits the final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to the general > public and to NTIA as well. > > 16. How will ICANN Board handle the final proposal > submitted by the ICG? > > The ICG expects that the final proposal, having achieved > consensus on the Coordination Group and within the Operational > Communities, will be welcomed by the ICANN Board and dutifully > transmitted to NTIA. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > > > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

11 21

Call # 6 - Archives
by Alice Jansen Nov. 4, 2014

Nov. 4, 2014

Dear ICG Members, For your information - Below you will find links to call # 6 archives (see - https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icg-archives-2014-07-31-en) Agenda - https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/agenda-icg-29oct14-en.pdf Chat transcript - https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/transcript-chat-icg-29oct14-en.… Recording EN - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-29oct14-en.mp3 Recording ES - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-29oct14-es.mp3 Recording RU - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-29oct14-ru.mp3 Recording PT - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-29oct14-pt.mp3 Recording ZH - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-29oct14-zh.mp3 Recording AR - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-29oct14-ar.mp3 Transcripts of the audio recordings (+ French) will be posted as soon as available. Thanks Best regards Alice

3 3

Update: Interpreters & Next Calls
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 30, 2014

Oct. 30, 2014

FR interpretation is now available on the 12th. Wednesday, November 12th 2014 ES PT FR AR ZH RU 18:00-19:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 19:00-20:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 20:00-21:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 21:00-22:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 23:00-24:00 UTC AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE Wednesday, November 26th 2014 ES PT FR AR ZH RU 02:00-03:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 03:00-04:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 04:00-05:00 UTC AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE 05:00-06:00 UTC AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE 06:00-07:00 UTC AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE Wednesday, December 10th 2014 ES PT FR AR ZH RU 10:00-11:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 11:00-12:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 12:00-13:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 13:00-14:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 14:00-15:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE

1 0

Call # 6 - Roll Call
by Alice Jansen Oct. 29, 2014

Oct. 29, 2014

Dear ICG Members, Please flag any inconsistencies you may notice (off list). We will share call archives as soon as available. Thanks! Best regards Alice ICG Members: Adiel Akplogan (NRO) Joseph Alhadeff (ICC-BASIS) Jari Arkko (IETF) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Keith Drazek (gTLD Registries) Patrik Fältström (SSAC) Demi Getschko (ISOC) Hartmut Glaser (ASO) Russ Housley (IAB) Manal Ismail (GAC) Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (GNSO) Milton Mueller (GNSO) Jon Nevett (gTLD Registries) Michael Niebel (GAC) Thomas Schneider (GAC) Lynn St Amour (IAB) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC) Mary Uduma (ccNSO) Liaisons: Kuo-Wei Wu (Board Liaison) Apologies: Kavouss Arasteh (GAC) James Bladel (GNSO) Martin Boyle (ccNSO) Narelle Clark (ISOC) Keith Davidson (ccNSO) Jandyr Dos Santos (GAC) Mohamed El Bashir (ALAC) Elise Gerich (IANA staff Expert Liaison) Daniel Karrenberg (RSSAC) Xiaodong Lee (ccNSO) Lars-Johan Liman (RSSAC) Russ Mundy (SSAC) Paul Wilson (NRO) Support: Samantha Dickinson Alice Jansen Ergys Ramaj Theresa Swinehart

1 0

Interpreters availability at next calls
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 29, 2014

Oct. 29, 2014

Here is some information: Wednesday, November 12th 2014 ES PT FR AR ZH RU 18:00-19:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 19:00-20:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 20:00-21:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 21:00-22:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 23:00-24:00 UTC AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE Wednesday, November 26th 2014 ES PT FR AR ZH RU 02:00-03:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 03:00-04:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 04:00-05:00 UTC AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE 05:00-06:00 UTC AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE 06:00-07:00 UTC AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE Wednesday, December 10th 2014 ES PT FR AR ZH RU 10:00-11:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 11:00-12:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 12:00-13:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 13:00-14:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 14:00-15:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE Patrik

1 0

Action items from teleconference of 29 October 2014
by Samantha Dickinson Oct. 29, 2014

Oct. 29, 2014

Action items: 1. After receiving enhanced assessment on conflict of interest statements by ICANN’s legal team, Akplogan to send email to private ICG mailing list to notify ICG members of the selected candidate for the ICG Secretariat, as well as details of the process used to select the final candidate. 2. ICG members to respond with any comments or questions they have on the final candidate selection within 48 hours of Akplogan sending the notification email to the private mailing list. 3. ICG members to complete Doodle poll for remaining three teleconference calls for the year. 4. ICG members to continue working on developing a draft of expections the ICG has of the ICANN Board's handling of the final stewardship proposal in time for the Board's discussion on the issue (discussion due by end of November). Please note that action items 3 and 4 relate to general discussion held on the call after the formal agenda item on Secretariat selection finished early. Regards Sam

1 0

REMINDER - 29 October - ICG Call #6
by Alice Jansen Oct. 29, 2014

Oct. 29, 2014

Dear ICG Members, This is to kindly remind you that your ICG call #6 is scheduled for: **TODAY** at 12:00-13:00 UTC See timezone conversion at: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ICG+Call+%236&iso=… An announcement was published on the ICANN website yesterday and may be found at: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2014-10-28-en You should have received an outlook calendar invite which includes the call details. In you cannot find it, please send me an email (off-list) and I will make sure to send you a copy prior to the call. Documents will be projected in the virtual meeting room - https://icann.adobeconnect.com/icg. To avoid echo, please make sure to mute your computer speakers as live audio from the meeting is being broadcast from the virtual meeting room. If you plan to use Skype to join the bridge, see attached instructions on how to mute the virtual meeting room. Note that the virtual meeting room will also be used to monitor the queue. To join the queue, press the "raise your hand" icon in the Adobe Connect room: [cid:3364EF36-9D4D-489F-A6D3-131BC32AE69B] If you are not in a position to join the virtual meeting room today, please let me know. Should you wish to follow the meeting in a different language: AR, ES, RU, ZH and PT interpretation services are available for this call. As indicated in the call details, FR interpretation is unavailable for this call and a transcript will be provided. Please also note that ICG members who join the conversation through the Adobe Connect microphone must use English when speaking to allow for the global multistakeholder community and ICG members to follow the English stream. The agenda circulated by Patrik (described as main agenda point) is: Procurement of the Secretariat for the ICG We would be very grateful if you could also state your name when speaking as the call will be recorded, transcribed and interpreted. As always, please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or concerns. Thanks, Best regards Alice

1 0

Teleconf Oct 29 at 12:00 UTC
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 28, 2014

Oct. 28, 2014

All, Looking at the results of the Doodle poll so far, I draw the conclusion that the call tomorrow will be at 12:00 UTC. Alice, please send call details. Main agenda point will be the procurement of the Secretariat for the ICG. Those who have not added poll data for the Doodle, please do so. The poll is not only for Oct 29, but also Nov 12, Nov 26 and Dec 10. Patrik

1 0

Poll for telephone conference times
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 28, 2014

Oct. 28, 2014

Hi, Thanks to everyone that have responded. We do at the moment have ten responses, out of 30 or so. Please come in with more data! <http://doodle.com/fq2w2tf476pdbszi> Patrik

1 0

Internpreters availability for call on Oct 29
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 27, 2014

Oct. 27, 2014

Here you see the availability: AR ES PT ZH FR RU 10:00-11:00 UTC NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 11:00-12:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 12:00-13:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 13:00-14:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE 14:00-15:00 UTC AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE AVAILABLE As always, if interpretation is not available, we will translate. Patrik

1 0

Doodle for telephone conferences
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 27, 2014

Oct. 27, 2014

Hi, I have a Doodle poll I want you to fill out for the four calls that we might have during the fall. I want to schedule the calls now, and then maybe cancel if needed. Calls are scheduled for: Wednesday October 29 around 12:00 UTC Wednesday November 12 around 20:00 UTC Wednesday November 26 around 04:00 UTC Wednesday December 10 around 12:00 UTC Please go to the following link and fill out your preferences: <http://doodle.com/fq2w2tf476pdbszi> Regards, Patrik Fältström

1 0

Upcoming ICANN meeting in Morocco
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 27, 2014

Oct. 27, 2014

Hi, There are rumours the meeting has been cancelled. ICANN issued a statement a few minutes ago, and it can be found here: <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-10-26-en> > Following Morocco's recent request to postpone the Africa Cup of Nations football tournament because of possible African travel restrictions, ICANN is in active and ongoing discussions with our ICANN 52 Marrakech hosts. > > ICANN is considering postponing the meeting in Marrakech scheduled for 8-12 February, 2015 as the likelihood of travel restrictions being imposed on nationals from African countries would reduce participation in the meeting. ICANN's multistakeholder, bottom up model relies on the broad, active participation of communities across geography and society. > > ICANN staff is working closely with the ICANN Board and its Community representatives. > > No decision has been taken yet, however ICANN understands the importance of providing timely updates and path forward on the status and location of ICANN 52. Patrik

2 1

Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 ..
by Joseph Alhadeff Oct. 26, 2014

Oct. 26, 2014

We really don't need any more detail than that... Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com) -----Original Message----- From: Manal Ismail [manal(a)tra.gov.eg] Received: Saturday, 25 Oct 2014, 2:24PM To: Patrik Fältström [paf(a)frobbit.se] Elise Gerich [elise.gerich(a)icann.org] CC: internal-cg(a)icann.org [internal-cg(a)icann.org] Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 .. Thanks Elise, Hartmut and Patrik .. I had the same understanding too and have reflected this in earlier versions .. Yet I changed the text based on the latest draft shared by Jandyr on behalf of the small drafting group (himself, Lynn & Xiaodong), which I recall was also supported by Jean-Jacques and Milton .. But I see your point and am happy to revert back to the earlier text, which stated: “The Board is represented on the ICG by one liaison. In addition, there is a liaison to the ICG from the IANA Department. Both liaisons are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the Board and ICG informed about the implications of the transition.” Is this ok? Should I also add the names ? Kind Regards --Manal From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:paf@frobbit.se] Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 6:06 PM To: Elise Gerich Cc: Manal Ismail; internal-cg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 .. I support this. Patrik On 25 okt 2014, at 17:13, Elise Gerich <elise.gerich(a)icann.org> wrote: Dear Manal, I thought the discussion on list had indicated that it is more accurate to say, ICANN is represented on the ICG by two liaisons rather than The Board is represented on the ICG by two liaisons. Kuo-Wei Wu is the Boards liaison to the ICG, and my role is a liaison from the ICANNs IANA department. My participation on the committee is not as a representative of the ICANN Board. Best regards, -- Elise From: Manal Ismail <manal(a)tra.gov.eg <mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg> > Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 at 11:48 PM To: "internal-cg(a)icann.org <mailto:internal-cg@icann.org> " <internal-cg(a)icann.org <mailto:internal-cg@icann.org> > Subject: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 .. Dear all .. Please find attached, and in Dropbox, a new version of ICG FAQ reflecting the latest views and comments shared .. I have also attached below the final compilation of answers to Q#15 & Q#16 for your convenience .. Kindly note that I took the liberty to change "ICG proposal" or "ICG's proposal" to "proposal submitted by the ICG", to avoid being misunderstood as attributing the community's proposal solely to the ICG .. Hope this is ok with everyone .. Happy to receive any further remarks or comments .. Kind Regards --Manal ---------------------------------------------------------- 15. What is the role of the ICANN Board in preparing the proposal? The ICG is independent of the ICANN Board. The Board is represented on the ICG by two liaisons (Mrs. Elise Gerich, IANA Staff Expert; and Mr. Kuo-Wei Wu, ICANN Board Liaison), who are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the Board and the ICG informed about the implications of the transition. Like any other member of the community, the ICANN Board can submit comments through the established procedures for public comment. Consistent with U.S. federal government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal submitted to it by the ICANN Board, but the Board does not have community approval to modify the proposal submitted by the ICG. When the ICG submits the final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to the general public and to NTIA as well. 16. How will ICANN Board handle the final proposal submitted by the ICG? The ICG expects that the final proposal, having achieved consensus on the Coordination Group and within the Operational Communities, will be welcomed by the ICANN Board and dutifully transmitted to NTIA. ------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

4 3

ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 25, 2014

Oct. 25, 2014

Dear all .. Please find attached, and in Dropbox, a new version of ICG FAQ reflecting the latest views and comments shared .. I have also attached below the final compilation of answers to Q#15 & Q#16 for your convenience .. Kindly note that I took the liberty to change "ICG proposal" or "ICG's proposal" to "proposal submitted by the ICG", to avoid being misunderstood as attributing the community's proposal solely to the ICG .. Hope this is ok with everyone .. Happy to receive any further remarks or comments .. Kind Regards --Manal ---------------------------------------------------------- 15. What is the role of the ICANN Board in preparing the proposal? The ICG is independent of the ICANN Board. The Board is represented on the ICG by two liaisons (Mrs. Elise Gerich, IANA Staff Expert; and Mr. Kuo-Wei Wu, ICANN Board Liaison), who are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the Board and the ICG informed about the implications of the transition. Like any other member of the community, the ICANN Board can submit comments through the established procedures for public comment. Consistent with U.S. federal government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal submitted to it by the ICANN Board, but the Board does not have community approval to modify the proposal submitted by the ICG. When the ICG submits the final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to the general public and to NTIA as well. 16. How will ICANN Board handle the final proposal submitted by the ICG? The ICG expects that the final proposal, having achieved consensus on the Coordination Group and within the Operational Communities, will be welcomed by the ICANN Board and dutifully transmitted to NTIA. ------------------------------------------------------------

6 6

Re: [Internal-cg] Revised Text on Question about ICG and ICANN board
by Joseph Alhadeff Oct. 23, 2014

Oct. 23, 2014

I'm not sure the nature of our charter is binding on the board in a legal sense. I would think we can find other words of equal strength that don't implicate a statement of legal fact. Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com) -----Original Message----- From: Milton L Mueller [mueller(a)syr.edu] Received: Friday, 17 Oct 2014, 5:25PM To: Subrenat, Jean-Jacques [jjs(a)dyalog.net] CC: internal-cg(a)icann.org [internal-cg(a)icann.org] Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Revised Text on Question about ICG and ICANN board > -----Original Message----- > - we must avoid discussing whether another body (ICANN Board, in this case) > is "authorized" or not to undertake any action. I suggest "Consistent with its I don't agree. ICANN's board is not authorized to alter the proposal. It's factually correct and the simplest way to say it. An FAQ should make things clear and simple, not obfuscate. _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

6 14

Re: [Internal-cg] RES: Revised Text on Question about ICG and ICANN board
by Joseph Alhadeff Oct. 23, 2014

Oct. 23, 2014

I would suggest a slight modification to "the ICANN Board can submit comments through the established procedures for public comment" this broader construct also covers the ability to comment on things other than the final proposal... Otherwise a very helpful draft. Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com) -----Original Message----- From: Jandyr Ferreira dos Santos Junior [jandyr.santos(a)itamaraty.gov.br] Received: Wednesday, 22 Oct 2014, 8:36AM To: 'Manal Ismail' [manal(a)tra.gov.eg] Subrenat, Jean-Jacques [jjs(a)dyalog.net] CC: internal-cg(a)icann.org [internal-cg(a)icann.org] Subject: [Internal-cg] RES: Revised Text on Question about ICG and ICANN board Dear Manal, Jean-Jacques, colleagues, As you remember Alissa asked 3 of us (Lynn, Xiadong and myself) to draft a possible compromise text to Q#15 on the role of the ICANN Board in submitting the transition proposal to the NTIA. Here it is a possible draft that tries to merge in a single text multiple suggestions on the issue. The ICG is independent of the ICANN board. The board is represented on the ICG by two liaisons (Mrs Elise Gerich, IANA Staff Expert; and Mr Kuo-Wei Wu, ICANN Board Liaison), who are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the board and ICG informed about the implications of the transition. Like any other member of the community, the ICANN board can submit public comments to the ICG about the final proposal. Consistent with U.S. federal government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal submitted to it by the ICANN board, but the Board does not have community approval to modify or approve the ICG's proposal. When the ICG submits its final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to the general public and to NTIA as well. Hope it can be useful. Best regards, Jandyr -----Mensagem original----- De: internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] Em nome de Manal Ismail Enviada em: quarta-feira, 22 de outubro de 2014 08:29 Para: Subrenat, Jean-Jacques Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org Assunto: Re: [Internal-cg] Revised Text on Question about ICG and ICANN board Thanks Jean-Jacques .. Fair enough .. Then we still have 3 alternative drafts on the table .. Any weighing preferences from other colleagues? Kind Regards --Manal Sent from my iPhone On Oct 22, 2014, at 11:59 AM, "Subrenat, Jean-Jacques" <jjs(a)dyalog.net> wrote: > Thanks Manal. > I still prefer my wording, which refers to a document, and that's an advantage. > If my proposal was not accepted, I could agree with Milton's suggestion (as already indicated in a previous email). > James' formulation, which merely expresses an expectation, is weaker than both Milton's and mine. > > Jean-Jacques. > > > > > ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Manal Ismail" <manal(a)tra.gov.eg> > À: "Milton L Mueller" <mueller(a)syr.edu>, "Demi Getschko" > <epusp75(a)gmail.com>, internal-cg(a)icann.org > Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Octobre 2014 11:45:55 > Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Revised Text on Question about ICG and ICANN > board > > > So here is where we stand on this now .. > > [Milton Mueller: but the Board does not have community approval to > modify or approve the ICG's proposal.] or > [Jean-Jacques: Consistent with its charter, the ICG considers that in > transmitting the Transition Plan to NTIA, the ICANN Board shall not > modify the Plan itself.] or [James Bladel: The ICG expects that its > proposal, having achieved consensus on the Coordination Group and > within the Operational Communities, will be welcomed by the ICANN > Board and dutifully transmitted to NTIA.] > > Any preferences for other colleagues .. > Jean-Jacques, mentioning you are ok with Milton's latest formulation > does this mean I should delete the second alternative? > > Kind Regards > --Manal > > -----Original Message----- > From: internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org > [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 9:50 PM > To: 'Demi Getschko'; 'internal-cg(a)icann.org' > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Revised Text on Question about ICG and > ICANN board > > Looks like that formulation is being "authorized" er, APPROVED heh > >> -----Original Message----- >> >> +1 >> demi >> From: joseph alhadeff [mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com] >> >> That works. >> >> On 10/21/2014 05:16 PM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote: >>> "does not have community approval" suits me. >>> >>> Jean-Jacques. > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

4 3

ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 21Oct14 ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 23, 2014

Oct. 23, 2014

Dear All .. Please find attached, and in Dropbox, an updated version of the ICG FAQ reflecting comments received at the f2f meeting and over email until 21 October 2014 .. Kindly note that I haven't crossed checked with the meeting transcripts yet but hope the attached accurately reflects all our discussions .. Also please note that we now have 3 alternative sentences as part of answer to Q#15 on ICG and the ICANN Board .. Jean-Jacques, you mentioned that you are ok with Milton's latest suggestion, please let me know if this means that I should delete your suggested wording .. If you wish, please feel free to edit the file directly using track changes and adding your initials to the file name .. Kind Regards --Manal

3 3

Re: [Internal-cg] Meeting Archives
by Manal Ismail Oct. 22, 2014

Oct. 22, 2014

1 0

Re: [Internal-cg] Meeting Archives
by Manal Ismail Oct. 22, 2014

Oct. 22, 2014

1 0

Draft short version of the minutes for third ICG face-to-face meeting, 17 October 2014
by Samantha Dickinson Oct. 21, 2014

Oct. 21, 2014

Hello all I have just completed the draft short version of the minutes. These are very short (6 pages for a full day's meeting) and do not show detail of the discussion, but as requested in the meeting today, focus on providing a little bit of context to the actions and decisions of the meeting. The short version of the minutes can be found on Dropbox: <https://www.dropbox.com/s/u6purzwddud2hl7/short-minutes-third-f2f-meeting-1…> I hope you all have a safe journey home. Regards Sam

6 8

Revised Text on Question about ICG and ICANN board
by Milton L Mueller Oct. 21, 2014

Oct. 21, 2014

What is the role of the ICANN board in preparing the proposal? The ICG is independent of the ICANN board. The board is represented on the ICG by two liaisons, who are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the board and ICG informed about the implications of the transition. Like any other member of the community, the ICANN board can submit public comments to the ICG about the final proposal. Consistent with U.S. federal government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal submitted to it by the ICANN board, but the board is not authorized to modify or approve the ICG's proposal. When the ICG submits its final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to the general public and to NTIA as well. Milton L Mueller Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor Syracuse University School of Information Studies http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/ Internet Governance Project http://internetgovernance.org<http://internetgovernance.org/>

2 5

ICG FAQ: review in light of f2f meeting discussions ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 21, 2014

Oct. 21, 2014

Dear All .. Please find attached a reviewed version of the FAQ reflecting the discussion during our face-to-face meeting in LA .. Until I double check with the transcripts, I hope the attached reflects everything accurately .. Apologies in advance for anything I may have overlooked .. This is not yet in dropbox as I would like to know how the file naming should be after we have already had a final version .. I have tried to conclude the exchange on the role of the Board in preparing the proposal .. The text in square brackets are 2 alternatives as suggested by Milton and Jean-Jacques .. 15. What is the role of the ICANN Board in preparing the proposal? The ICG is independent of the ICANN Board. The Board is represented on the ICG by one liaison. In addition, there is a liaison to the ICG from IANA. Both liaisons are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the Board and ICG informed about the implications of the transition. Like any other member of the community, the ICANN Board can submit public comments to the ICG about the final proposal. Consistent with U.S. federal government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal submitted to it by the ICANN, [but the Board is not authorized to modify or approve the ICG's proposal.] or [Consistent with its charter, the ICG considers that in transmitting the Transition Plan to NTIA, the ICANN Board shall not modify the Plan itself.] When the ICG submits its final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to the general public and to NTIA as well. Also I'm not sure whether we have concluded that the below should be a separate question or part of the above answer .. 17. How will the community see the final proposal submitted by the ICG? When the ICG submits its final proposal to ICANN, this will be released to the general public, and NTIA as well. Awaiting your feedback .. Safe travels to all who are still on their way like myself .. Kind Regards --Manal

2 2

Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ: review in light of f2f meeting discussions ..
by Elise Gerich Oct. 21, 2014

Oct. 21, 2014

Dear Manal, Will you please make a small revision to the following sentence? The revisions are highlighted in yellow below. "In addition, there is a liaison to the ICG from the IANA Department.² Thank you, -- Elise From: Manal Ismail <manal(a)tra.gov.eg> Date: Sunday, October 19, 2014 at 4:12 AM To: "internal-cg(a)icann.org" <internal-cg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ: review in light of f2f meeting discussions .. > Dear All .. > Please find attached a reviewed version of the FAQ reflecting the discussion > during our face-to-face meeting in LA .. Until I double check with the > transcripts, I hope the attached reflects everything accurately .. Apologies > in advance for anything I may have overlooked .. > > This is not yet in dropbox as I would like to know how the file naming should > be after we have already had a final version .. > I have tried to conclude the exchange on the role of the Board in preparing > the proposal .. The text in square brackets are 2 alternatives as suggested by > Milton and Jean-Jacques .. >> 1. What is the role of the ICANN Board in preparing the proposal? > The ICG is independent of the ICANN Board. The Board is represented on the > ICG by one liaison. In addition, there is a liaison to the ICG from IANA. > Both liaisons are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to > keep the Board and ICG informed about the implications of the transition. > Like any other member of the community, the ICANN Board can submit public > comments to the ICG about the final proposal. Consistent with U.S. federal > government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal > submitted to it by the ICANN, > [but the Board is not authorized to modify or approve the ICG's proposal.] > or > [Consistent with its charter, the ICG considers that in transmitting the > Transition Plan to NTIA, the ICANN Board shall not modify the Plan itself.] > When the ICG submits its final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to > the general public and to NTIA as well. > > Also I¹m not sure whether we have concluded that the below should be a > separate question or part of the above answer .. >> 1. How will the community see the final proposal submitted by the ICG? > When the ICG submits its final proposal to ICANN, this will be released to the > general public, and NTIA as well. > > Awaiting your feedback .. > Safe travels to all who are still on their way like myself .. > > Kind Regards > --Manal >

3 3

Meeting Archives
by Alice Jansen Oct. 19, 2014

Oct. 19, 2014

1 0

Subscription mechanism for "icg-forum" archive?
by Paul Wilson Oct. 18, 2014

Oct. 18, 2014

Colleagues, Yesterday I shared the message below on the RIR community ianaxfer list, to draw attention to ICG submissions which have been sent so far (as invited in the announcement here: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-08-08-en) The first reply I received was a request for an email subscription mechanism, so that people don’t have to continually check this site for new submissions. I think this would be very useful, so I wonder if others agree, and if so whether a subscription mechanism can be set up by the Secretariat? thanks! Paul. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg(a)apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 Begin forwarded message: > From: Paul Wilson <pwilson(a)apnic.net> > Subject: Submissions to the ICG - archive site > Date: 18 October 2014 9:58:37 am AEST > To: NRO IANAxfer List <ianaxfer(a)nro.net> > > Dear Colleagues, > > As a member of the ICG, I want to advise the NRO community of the submissions to the ICG so far, which are archived here: > > http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum > > > For more info on the ICG, please see: > > http://ianacg.org > > > All the best, > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg(a)apnic.net> > http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 > > >

1 0

Q14 (ICANN board) proposed text
by Milton L Mueller Oct. 18, 2014

Oct. 18, 2014

What is the role of the ICANN board in preparing the proposal? The ICG is independent of the ICANN board. The board is represented on the ICG by two liaisons, who are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the board informed about our deliberations. The board is not authorized to modify or approve the ICG's proposal, but for legal reasons, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal submitted to it by the ICANN board. Milton L Mueller Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor Syracuse University School of Information Studies http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/ Internet Governance Project http://internetgovernance.org<http://internetgovernance.org/>

5 6

Meeting planning slide deck
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Here are the slides. It can also be found in the "Planning future meetings" folder in Dropbox. Patrik

1 0

ICG Charter on website, and other documents
by Paul Wilson Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Dear all, I find that the ICG Charter is not easy to find. This link is included in the RFP, but I don’t see in anywhere obvious on the website. https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/charter-icg-27aug14-en.pdf Could secretariat add a link to the “Coordination Group” page. On the same topic of easy navigation, could there also be a page for "ICG Documents” with links to the Charter and RFP and (I suggest) the others that we have stored under “Distributed Documents" on Dropbox. (as an alternative, this could be a separate “Documents” section on the “Transition Resources” page). Thanks, Paul. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg(a)apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100

3 3

Pointer to IANA Department info from ICANN 51
by Elise Gerich Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Here are the links to the presentation materials and audio from the IANA Department presentation ( Who, What, Why?) at the ICANN 51 meeting. This was presentation was to describe what the job is. http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-iana/presentation-iana-13oct14-en http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-iana If you have any questions about the presentation, please feel free to contact me. -- Elise

6 8

Proposed agenda for Oct 17 meeting
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Hi all, See below the proposed agenda for our October 17 meeting. Please send your feedback. Note that it is possible that we will have a private session (not open to public observers or remote participants on audio, video, or Adobe Connect) to discuss confidential matters relating to the secretariat selection. This has not been firmed up yet, but in the event that it is necessary to have this be a private session, I’ve listed it as the very first topic to make things easier to manage logistically. Best, Alissa ---------------------------------------------------------------- == ICG Working Meeting at ICANN 51 == Friday, October 17, 09:00-17:30 PT == Agenda Independent secretariat status update (Adiel) *Possible private session* 9:00-9:45 Welcome (Alissa) 9:45-10:00 - Agenda review - Minutes approval from October 1 call FAQ (Manal) 10:00-11:15 Break 11:15-11:45 ICG relationship to Enhancing ICANN Accountability process (TBD) 11:45-12:45 Lunch 12:45-13:45 Proposal finalization process (Alissa) 13:45-15:15 Break 15:15-15:30 Community transition proposal process updates (Everyone) 15:30-16:15 - Meant to be a discussion of any concerns/issues arising as opposed to status updates. Future conference call and meeting schedule (Patrik) 16:15-16:30 Parking lot for items we want to return to 16:30-17:15 Wrap-up (Alissa) 17:15-17:30

4 9

LINK - Board Consideration of Recommendations from the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability
by Alice Jansen Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-16-en#2.d

1 0

Virtual Meeting Room link
by Alice Jansen Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Dear ICG Members, Here is a link to the Virtual Meeting Room - https://icann.adobeconnect.com/icg/ Best regards Alice

1 0

Draft minutes of 1 October teleconference
by Samantha Dickinson Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Hello all The draft minutes of the last teleconference are now available on Dropbox in the Minutes folder. The direct link is: < https://www.dropbox.com/s/okd0ocrlwagn72b/minutes-teleconference-1-october-… > Regards Sam

9 12

Reminder - ICG social event
by Alice Jansen Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Dear ICG Members, This is to kindly remind you that your social event is this evening at 20:00. Location: Glass Lounge - Intercontinental Hotel Best regards Alice --- [cid:793F1344-1F83-49DB-93C6-A0BC280BE1C9]

8 8

Re: [Internal-cg] Reminder - ICG social event
by mnuduma Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Thanks Sent from Samsung Mobile -------- Original message -------- From: Alice Jansen <alice.jansen(a)icann.org> Date: 16/10/2014 16:46 (GMT-08:00) To: internal-cg(a)icann.org Subject: [Internal-cg] Reminder - ICG social event Dear ICG Members, This is to kindly remind you that your social event is this evening at 20:00. Location: Glass Lounge – Intercontinental Hotel Best regards Alice ---

1 0

GAC nominee to ICG
by Heather.Dryden＠ic.gc.ca Oct. 16, 2014

Oct. 16, 2014

Dear Alissa, ICG colleagues, This is to advise you that, following the GAC elections, the incoming GAC Chair, Mr Thomas Schneider, will replace me as a GAC nominee to the ICG with effect from Friday 17 October 2014. Best of luck to you all with the challenge ahead! Heather Dryden

2 1

Thursday session on accountability
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 16, 2014

Oct. 16, 2014

I have been invited to participate in the Thursday community session about enhancing ICANN accountability <http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/thu-enhancing-accountability>. There is a large panel of speakers and I will have a 5-minute slot. I have been asked to talk about how the ICG plans to link to the parallel accountability process and what discussions have taken place about this so far. Obviously we have been discussing this a bit amongst ourselves in the context of the proposal finalization process and the FAQ, both of which are on our agenda for further discussion on Friday. We also have a slot on Friday to discuss how we will liaise with the accountability CCWG. While the results of these discussions are TBD, I think there are a few points I can make, slightly expanding on what is in the FAQ: 1. Our charter recognizes that maintaining the accountability of Internet identifier governance is central to the transition process. 2. The ICG has asked the operational communities to consider oversight and accountability — writ large, i.e., "all the ways in which oversight is conducted over the IANA functions operator’s provision of the services and activities” — in their proposals. 3. After receiving consensus proposals from the operational communities regarding IANA, the ICG will conduct an analysis and assessment of their implications for ICANN accountability. We are still discussing what this analysis and assessment will entail, and this will depend somewhat on the extent to which ICANN accountability is the focus of one or more community proposals. 4. We will be having further discussion on Friday to determine how we will procedurally liaise with the accountability CCWG, including how and when we might communicate the analysis/assessment described in (3). Thoughts? Alissa

15 30

NTIA Clarity was RE: Minor issue with timeline language
by Narelle Clark Oct. 16, 2014

Oct. 16, 2014

One even greater source of clarity would be the NTIA. I asked the same question of Larry Strickling personally this week and rather than claim to be a perfect relay agent, I think we should invite him to meet with the ICG. I would hope his diary would have the capacity to accommodate such a meeting. In case you were wondering, he reassured me that he was expecting an identical document to come from ICANN as went to ICANN from the ICG. Like I said, however, I expect we would prefer he said that to us himself. Best regards Narelle > -----Original Message----- > From: internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] > On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper > Sent: Friday, 17 October 2014 2:02 AM > To: Subrenat, Jean-Jacques > Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Minor issue with timeline language > > In addition to the various statements that have been made about this issue this > week, I've also reached out to a few ICANN board and staff folks about the > possibility of us issuing a joint statement outlining the proposal transmission > steps. So that is an option for us as well if we want to go down that path. > > Alissa > > > > > On Oct 12, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques <jjs(a)dyalog.net> wrote: > > > > Hartmut, > > good catch! Yes, I should have written ICG instead of IGC. > > Jean-Jacques. > > > > ----- Mail original ----- > > De: "Hartmut Richard Glaser" <glaser(a)cgi.br> > > À: "Jean-Jacques Subrenat" <jjs(a)dyalog.net>, "Russ Mundy" > > <mundy(a)tislabs.com> > > Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org > > Envoyé: Dimanche 12 Octobre 2014 14:11:14 > > Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Minor issue with timeline language > > > > > > IGC = ICG ??? > > > > ==================================== > > > > On 12/10/14 16:46, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote: > > > > > > This (Sunday) morning the ALAC received the visit of the CEO/President of > ICANN. > > Fadi started his presentation by underlining the importance of the transition > plan, before any other topic. > > During Q&A, and speaking as a representative of the ALAC, I mentioned that > the IGC would be sending its transition plan formally through ICANN, and > highlighted the fact that ICANN (Board and/or Staff) should abstain from any > modification of the plan itself. > > I asked him to bring this to the attention of his colleagues on the ICANN > Board: he said he would do that. > > > > Jean-Jacques. > > > > ----- Mail original ----- > > De: "Russ Mundy" <mundy(a)tislabs.com> À: "Jean-Jacques Subrenat" > > <jjs(a)dyalog.net> Cc: "Russ Mundy" <mundy(a)tislabs.com> , "WUKnoben" > > <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de> , internal-cg(a)icann.org Envoyé: > > Dimanche 12 Octobre 2014 12:36:15 > > Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Minor issue with timeline language > > > > > > In the 14 March announcement, NTIA tasked ICANN with "to convene global > stakeholders to develop a proposal to transition the current role played by NTIA" > and the IANA Functions contract is between NTIA & ICANN so it is entirely > reasonable for NTIA to want the response to their announcement to come from > ICANN. I support the solution suggested by Daniel for the ICG to simultaneously > deliver the final proposal to both NTIA and ICANN. > > > > I would also like to suggest that we consider some technical means of > "signing" the final proposal using something like a gpg/pgp signature and > publishing the public key on the ICG web site - in that way, anyone on the > Internet can tell if any changes have been made to the ICG proposal. > > > > I would not object to the exact wording suggested by JJ but I do think that the > last sentence is unnecessary - I think that it would be much better to use a > technical means to get assurance that ICANN would not make any changes to > the report. > > > > Russ > > > > On Oct 11, 2014, at 1:38 AM, "Subrenat, Jean-Jacques" <jjs(a)dyalog.net> > wrote: > > > > As stated in a previous email, I suggest once again that we add that the > content will not be modified by ICANN or any other entity. Also, the addition > proposed by Daniel (ICG sending the plan to NTIA both directly and through > ICANN) should be retained. > > > > Thus, > > "Following on NTIA's request, and consistent with procurement rules within > ICANN, the ICG shall submit its Transition Plan to the NTIA directly, as well as > formally through ICANN. The content of the plan shall in no way be altered, > redacted or modified by ICANN as the designated channel of transmission." > > > > Thanks, > > Jean-Jacques. > > > > > > > > > > ----- Mail original ----- > > De: "WUKnoben" <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de> À: "Kavouss Arasteh" > > <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> , "Daniel Karrenberg" > > <daniel.karrenberg(a)ripe.net> Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org Envoyé: Samedi > > 11 Octobre 2014 09:18:59 > > Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Minor issue with timeline language > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree here. > > > > Perhaps a reference in our submission/transmission whatsoever to NTIA’s > request maybe helpful: > > > > “Following the NTIA request in consistence with procurement rules as well as > practical matter, the ICG submits - formally through ICANN - the transition > proposal to NTIA.” > > > > > > Best regards > > > > Wolf-Ulrich > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Kavouss Arasteh > > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2014 6:09 PM > > To: Daniel Karrenberg > > Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Minor issue with > > timeline language > > > > > > > > Dear All, > > For me does not matter whether ICG transmit to NTIA,or ICANN transmit > > , without any edit ,whatsoever, to NTIA,.or ICG transmit to NTIA with > > a copy to ICANN,or ICG transmit to NTIA and ICANN simultaneously ( not > > coped to ICANN but transmittal to ICANN) The important issue is ICANN > > should not touch, edit, comment on the final Report Kavouss > > > > > > > > 2014-10-10 14:57 GMT+02:00 Daniel Karrenberg < daniel.karrenberg(a)ripe.net > > : > > > > > > publish & transmit to ntia & transmit to icann. these days one cannot > > any longer distinguish between orignial and copy. ;-) > > > > ---------- > > Sent from a hand held device. > > > > On 10.10.2014, at 13:13, joseph alhadeff < joseph.alhadeff(a)oracle.com > > wrote: > > > > It would seem that if we publish the proposal just after transmission to ICANN > and copy NTIA on that missive that we have insured that no one can > misunderstand what we proposed. > > > > On 10/10/2014 6:44 AM, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > > Jean-Jacques, > > > > Je suggère que nous allons faire notre travail, sans préjudice de ce que autres > vont faire avec le résultat. Nous le faisons d'une manière transparente et à ce > que tout le monde peut prendre acte du résultat. Une fois que nous avons fait > notre travail nous avons terminé et il sera pour les autres à faire leur choix. Il > serait vain pour nous de prévoir des règles sur la façon dont ce qui se passera > lorsque nous aurons terminé. > > > > Amicalement > > > > Daniel > > > > --------- > > > > rough translation: > > > > > > I suggest we do our job without prejudice about what others will do with it. > We do it in a transparent manner and such that everyone can take note of the > result. Once we have done our job we are finished and it will be for others to > make their choices. It would be futile and therfore unwise for us to stipulate > rules on how what will happen after we are finished. > > > > Read: ICANN will be judged by and suffer the consequences of what they do > with the final proposal. > > > > Read also: we will be judged by our (futile) debates and actions, > > > > Daniel > > > > ---------- > > Sent from a hand held device. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list > > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

1 0

Minor issue with timeline language
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 16, 2014

Oct. 16, 2014

Hi all, The folks at NTIA have pointed out to me that as a practical matter and to remain consistent with their procurement rules, ICANN is the entity that needs to submit the final transition proposal to NTIA. If you look at our published timeline, it says the following in step 7: "If no concerns are found, the ICG formally submits the final proposal to NTIA." I suggest that we should update this to say: "If no concerns are found, the ICG formally submits the final proposal to ICANN for delivery to NTIA.” Let me know what you think. Thanks, Alissa

17 27

Slides for meeting Thursday
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 16, 2014

Oct. 16, 2014

As of today, I find the following will present: - Alissa - Milton - Martin - Jari - Adiel If I do not hear from you, I expect you will use same slides as you use at the meeting with GAC (if you did use slides). If you want to use other slides, please let me (and/or Alice and Ergys) know ASAP! Patrik

4 3

Logistics for meetings Thursday and Friday
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 15, 2014

Oct. 15, 2014

All, Here is an outline of the logistics for the meetings Thursday and Friday. Look at the three issues below please! Thursday 10:00-12:00, Los Angeles Room - Two lines of mikes, one for old questions, one for new - Two rows of chairs, one behind the other, for ICG members - Me and Mohamed will not be on the chairs, but instead moderating with mikes - Alissa on stage, opening, closing, running meeting etc - Timers 2 min for everyone speaking after Alissa and operational communities introductions - Remote participants might chat (text) and Alice will read the text - Remote Hubs will be able to speak themselves, with fallback Alice read - Alice will be at a table by the side of the stage - Alice + Ergys + Patrik (at least) is in a Skype chat within which Alice let Patrik know whether remote participation is requested Friday 0900-1730, Westside Room: - First 45 min closed - Microphones, translation during the first 45 min - Alice and Ergys will be outside the doors stopping people from going in - Remote participation for ICG members is possible (via bridge) first 45 min - Approximately 5 min will be needed to change from closed to open meeting - Scribe will be on one screen - Other screen available for presentation - First 45 min will be minuted but not scribed

4 5

GAC-ICG Mtg - SANTA MONICA room
by Alice Jansen Oct. 15, 2014

Oct. 15, 2014

Dear ICG Members, Please note that the GAC meetings are now being held in the Santa Monica meeting room. Your meeting with the GAC is today at 10:30-11:30. The room change has been reflected in your meeting schedule: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/icg-losangeles51-schedule-01oct… Remote participation details are available at: http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-gac-icg Best regards Alice

1 0

SSAC Report on the IANA Functions Contract (SAC068) Now Published
by Russ Mundy Oct. 15, 2014

Oct. 15, 2014

Since folks on this list found the previous SSAC report on the overview and history of IANA Functions to be of interest, it seemed useful to let folks know that the SSAC Report on the IANA Functions Contract (SAC068) is now published and is available at: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/documents-2012-02-25-en Russ

5 4

Report SAC068
by WUKnoben Oct. 14, 2014

Oct. 14, 2014

Can anyone put the report sac068 to the dropbox? I can’t find it on the website Best regards Wolf-Ulrich

2 2

Placeholder questions from ALAC
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 13, 2014

Oct. 13, 2014

The ALAC chair has shared a few placeholder questions with me for our Tuesday session and I wanted to pass them on: How decisions are made? How will proposals be consolidated? How does the ICG suggest handling Orphan Issues that do not fit in one or another operational community proposal? Proposals vs. Inputs -- will Inputs only be comments on the proposals? Can Inputs be any types of input? Will inputs from ICG members be considered on the same level as Proposals? Emphasize that Accountability component is needed for all proposals coming to the ICG. Alissa

6 11

The Jordan Carter / InternetNZ document
by Keith Davidson Oct. 13, 2014

Oct. 13, 2014

Hi all, Following on from Milton Muellers suggestion in the CWG IANA meeting, attached is the Jordan Carter / InternetNZ position paper on IANA and a number of scenarios for transitioning to. Some members of both groups may find this informative. Cheers Keith Davidson

1 0

Slides for ICANN51 meetings
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 13, 2014

Oct. 13, 2014

I put together a few slides to use to provide an introduction to the ICG at our community discussion and other meetings at ICANN51. I’m not a big fan of words on slides, but there are some words on these slides. :) I stripped some of the detail from the timeline to make it presentable on slides, with the idea of using the timeline as a vehicle for explaining the proposal development process going forward. In the side meetings I will probably not use all of these since time is limited. Alissa

7 13

Slides for meetings during ICANN Week
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 13, 2014

Oct. 13, 2014

All, With respect to the Thursday session - since the meeting is taking place in the ballroom, meetings team ask that we provide them with the slides (in the case slides are to be used) at least 24 hours prior to the session. If we could have the final set ready on Wednesday, that would be great! I also encourage people to be ready early for slides for the sessions with ALAC and GAC, if that is used. Patrik

3 3

Hubs
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 13, 2014

Oct. 13, 2014

Hi, I have just got information on the hubs described in this attached ppt will be the ones following the discussion on Thursday. Patrik

1 0

Agenda for public meeting Thursday
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 13, 2014

Oct. 13, 2014

All, As part of the open meeting on Thursday, we have one slot where parties expecting to submit a response to our RFP is presenting where they are etc. I have not got any special requests (yet) although that might come up during the ICANN week. To make our and the presenters life easier, I bootstrap the allocation of slots with the following three parties that I know will already present at the meetings we have with GAC and ALAC: Numbers community process — how it works, how to participate, etc. — Adiel Protocol parameters community process — how it works, how to participate, etc. — Jari/Russ Names community process — how it works, how to participate, etc. — Martin/Milton If you want to hand over to someone else, please let me know. I also would like to know which one of Jari/Russ and Martin/Milton is to present. We also need to lock this down (including if you have slides) I guess 48 hours before the session so that ICANN can prepare Adobe Connect etc for remote participants. Can the named people above confirm they are interested in speaking, or find someone else from their community? Can I also asap get indication from others that want to say something? Regards, Patrik

2 1

Poll: Dates for the meeting in February 2015
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 12, 2014

Oct. 12, 2014

All, Please respond to this Doodle poll regarding the dates for the face to face meeting adjacent to the ICANN Meeting in Marrakech, Morocco, in February 2015. There are two alternatives: - Before the ICANN meeting: Friday-Saturday, February 6-7 - After the ICANN meeting: Friday-Saturday, February 12-13 Please do use the Doodle poll at <http://doodle.com/9w7vyde29tvmztpb> to let us know your availability. Regards, Patrik Fältström Co-Chair, ICG

7 14

FAQ page
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 12, 2014

Oct. 12, 2014

The initial FAQ page is up: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icg-faqs-2014-10-10-en

1 0

On coordination with the Enhancing ICANN Accountability Process ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 12, 2014

Oct. 12, 2014

Dear All .. Reference to our discussion on ICG coordination with the Enhancing ICANN Accountability Process, I would like to bring to colleagues’ attention the announcement at: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2014-10-10-en, particularly the following: “…given the input over the course of the discussions on this process, it's suggested that the CCWG has two work steams: one focused on accountability in light of ICANN's changing historical relationship with the U.S. Government; and the second, on the broader accountability issues the community would like to bring to the forefront.” <http://click.icptrack.com/icp/track.php?msgid=949263&act=MI8Z&r=25971199&c=…> Apologies if you have already read and took note of the above .. Kind Regards --Manal

1 0

Re: [Internal-cg] Minor issue with timeline language
by mnuduma Oct. 11, 2014

Oct. 11, 2014

+1@ Narelle and Lynn. Mary Uduma Sent from Samsung Mobile -------- Original message -------- From: Narelle Clark <narelle.clark(a)accan.org.au> Date: 09/10/2014 19:47 (GMT-05:00) To: "Lynn St.Amour" <Lynn(a)lstamour.org>,Alissa Cooper <alissa(a)cooperw.in> Cc: ICG <internal-cg(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Minor issue with timeline language Lynn's first revised wording is better, and I prefer a clearer statement that this is a piece compiled by the ICG through the community, independent of ICANN, and delivered, unchanged to the NTIA. Narelle > -----Original Message----- > From: internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] > On Behalf Of Lynn St.Amour > Sent: Friday, 10 October 2014 1:04 AM > To: Alissa Cooper > Cc: ICG > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Minor issue with timeline language > > Hi Alissa, > > Various definitions of "submit" say: "given to a person or body for consideration > or judgment" or "to give (a document, proposal, piece of writing, etc.) to > someone so that it can be considered or approved". > > To make the ICG's intent and responsibility more clear we might say: > > "If no concerns are found, the ICG SENDS the final proposal to ICANN for > delivery to NTIA." > > or > > "If no concerns are found, the ICG's proposal is transmitted to NTIA via ICANN". > > > Best, > Lynn > > > > > On Oct 8, 2014, at 5:39 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa(a)cooperw.in> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > The folks at NTIA have pointed out to me that as a practical matter and to > remain consistent with their procurement rules, ICANN is the entity that needs > to submit the final transition proposal to NTIA. If you look at our published > timeline, it says the following in step 7: > > > > "If no concerns are found, the ICG formally submits the final proposal to > NTIA." > > > > I suggest that we should update this to say: > > > > "If no concerns are found, the ICG formally submits the final proposal to > ICANN for delivery to NTIA." > > > > Let me know what you think. > > > > Thanks, > > Alissa > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list > > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

1 0

Final schedule? RE: Provisional ICANN 51 schedule
by Narelle Clark Oct. 10, 2014

Oct. 10, 2014

How final is this schedule then? Any further updates? TIA Narelle > -----Original Message----- > From: internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] > On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper > Sent: Wednesday, 1 October 2014 4:45 AM > To: ICG > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Provisional ICANN 51 schedule > > Minor updates are below. We will discuss this briefly on the Oct 1 call. > > Meeting with ALAC > Tuesday, 14 October 15:45-16:45 PT > Room: Olympic > https://community.icann.org/x/TMLhAg > http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/tue-alac-work-ii > Speakers: Alissa (ICG intro), TBD (numbers), Martin (names), Jari/Russ H. > (protocol parameters) > All other available ICG members welcome > > Meeting with GAC > Wednesday, 15 October 10:30-11:30 PT > Location TBC > Speakers: Alissa (ICG intro), Adiel (numbers), Martin/Milton (names), Jari/Russ H. > (protocol parameters) All other available ICG members welcome > > Community Discussion with the ICG > Thursday, 16 October 10:00-12:00 PT > Room: Los Angeles > http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/thu-icg-community > Agenda discussion: > http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/2014-September/001744.html > > ICG Dinner > Thursday, 16 October 20:15-22:00 PT > Location TBC > > ICG Mtg #3 [2] > Friday, 17 October 09:00-17:30 PT > Room: Westside > http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/fri-icg > Patrik, Mohamed, and I will share a draft agenda for this meeting prior to the > start of ICANN 51. > > > > On 9/25/14, 10:56 AM, "Alissa Cooper" <alissa(a)cooperw.in> wrote: > > >Here is the provisional schedule for ICANN 51: > > > >Meeting with ALAC [1] > >Tuesday, 14 October 15:45-16:45 PT > >Room: Olympic > > > >https://community.icann.org/x/TMLhAg > > > >http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/tue-alac-work-ii > > > > > >(Unconfirmed) Meeting with GAC [1] > >Wednesday, 15 October 10:30-11:30 PT > >Location TBC > > > >Community Discussion with the ICG [2] > >Thursday, 16 October 10:00-12:00 PT > >Room: Los Angeles > >http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/thu-icg-community > > > >ICG Dinner > >Thursday, 16 October 20:15-22:00 PT > >Location TBC > > > >ICG Mtg #3 [3] > >Friday, 17 October 09:00-17:30 PT > >Room: Westside > >http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/fri-icg > > > >[1] I have reached out individually to ICG members off-list to ensure > >that we have people at each of these meetings who can speak about the > >processes being used to develop the names, numbers, and protocol > >parameters proposals, respectively, and how to participate in those processes. > >Participation from the rest of the ICG members is desirable but not > >required if you have scheduling conflicts. I have also reached out to > >CWG folks to see if a CWG-ICG meeting might be arranged and will share > >more information when I have it. > > > >[2] Patrik is working on the agenda for this session. > > > >[3] Patrik, Mohamed, and I will share a draft agenda for this meeting > >prior to the start of ICANN 51. > > > >Alissa > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Internal-cg mailing list > >Internal-cg(a)icann.org > >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

2 1

Secretariat - request and update
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 10, 2014

Oct. 10, 2014

Hi all, I have been working with the vice-chairs, Adiel, and ICANN on a number of aspects related to the selection of the independent secretariat. I wanted to make a request to the group and also provide an update. == Request for an additional reviewer == As a result of discussions with the ICANN procurement staff, we believe that having a total of 5 reviewers to review and score all of the secretariat applicants would be ideal. It helps to have an odd number of reviewers in the evaluations come out somewhat split. We have at present four reviewers who have committed or have already provided reviews and scores for all applicants (Adiel and Russ have completed their evaluations; Jean-Jacques has now evaluated and provided scores for all applicants; and Mohamed is currently doing evaluations of all applicants). We’d like to get one more reviewer to complete this task. Please respond to this message if you are willing to be a reviewer. A later stage of the procurement process will involve group interviews with the finalists. Reviewers should be willing to participate in group interviews as well. All 5 will not need to be present if scheduling does not allow, but please do not sign up to review if you are not willing to also interview. Adiel is working with the ICANN procurement staff on a timeline for the remainder of the process and he will share that with the group when it is ready. == Discussion fora == As you know, to select an independent secretariat we are following ICANN’s procurement rules as the secretariat will be contracted with ICANN. One of those rules is that the identities of candidates and other information about them and their bids must remain confidential throughout the entire procurement process. This rule is necessary to prevent bidders from gaining advantages over one another or over ICANN as the contracting party by obtaining information about their competitors. It helps ensure the credibility of the procurement process and is a fairly standard rule of purchasing ethics. We had a bit of a slip here when some candidate information was posted to this mailing list (and then quoted in response emails), as this mailing list has a public archive. Those emails have been removed from the public archive. The list of emails that has been removed is attached. We are in the process of establishing a private mailing list with no public archive specifically for the purpose of having confidential secretariat selection discussions among the full ICG. You will be automatically subscribed to this list once it is created. When we need to discuss confidential secretariat selection information face-to-face or on a conference call, those meetings will also be private. Transcripts will not be provided. Non-confidential minutes of decisions taken can be provided afterward. It is extremely important that all information shared on this private mailing list or in private ICG discussions remain confidential amongst the 30 members and 2 liaisons of the ICG. You should treat the information shared on this list and in private ICG discussions the same way you would treat your own confidential information. We are not going to go through the process of having everyone sign an NDA, but you should treat your confidentiality obligation as if you had signed one. Leaking information about secretariat candidates outside of this group while the procurement process is ongoing will jeopardize our ability to credibly select a vendor for this purpose. If you feel you cannot maintain confidentiality, you should unsubscribe from the private list and recuse yourself from private ICG discussions. Once the contract with the vendor is signed, we should be able to make public some information about that decision, and at that time it will be clearly communicated to you (and publicly) which information that is. And of course the procurement process and documents are already public. It is also extremely important that you only share information on the private mailing list and in private discussions that needs to be discussed in private. These private fora are not meant to be replacements for this list or the rest of our meetings. We should all be vigilant to limit our confidential discussions to the purpose for which we establish them, and continue to carry on in full transparency on all other matters. We will be having a private discussion of secretariat matters as the first slot on our F2F agenda, October 17, 9:00-9:45. Alice will be sending conference bridge details to remote participants. I have also invited Xavier Calvez, CFO of ICANN, to join us for that session so that he can answer questions that you may have. Thanks, Alissa

4 4

Fwd: Procedural Issue
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 9, 2014

Oct. 9, 2014

Begin forwarded message: > From: Fiona Alexander <FAlexander(a)ntia.doc.gov> > Subject: Procedural Issue > Date: October 7, 2014 at 12:18:30 PM PDT > To: "Alissa(a)cooperw.in" <Alissa(a)cooperw.in> > Cc: Ashley Heineman <AHeineman(a)ntia.doc.gov> > > Hi Alissa > > I hope things are well. We at NTIA wanted to once again thank you and the members of the ICG for all your hard work. NTIA is actively monitoring things and took note of the process time line posted by the ICG on Sept 8th. We wanted to alert you now that we see a procedural issue with “step 7” as proposed. As articulated in our March announcement, we asked ICANN as the both IANA functions contractor and the global coordinator for the DNS to convene the multistakeholder process to develop the transition plan. (See: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition…) This means as practical matter and consistent with procurement rules, ICANN must be the part that formally submits the transition proposal to NTIA. While not a substantive concern, we wanted to flag this procedural issue now so that it can be addressed by the ICG and ICANN well in advance. > > Thank you > > Fiona > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Fiona M. Alexander > Associate Administrator for International Affairs > National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) > (202) 482-1866 > www.ntia.doc.gov > >

4 3

Agenda for ALAC/GAC meetings
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 9, 2014

Oct. 9, 2014

Here is the proposed agenda for the ALAC and GAC meetings we’re having next week: Brief ICG background/status update — Alissa (3-5 mins) Numbers community process — how it works, how to participate, etc. — Adiel (5-7 mins) Protocol parameters community process — how it works, how to participate, etc. — Jari/Russ (5-7 mins total) Names community process — how it works, how to participate, etc. — Martin/Milton (5-7 mins total) Q&A — (32-42 mins) I think leaving a lot of time for Q&A is the most important thing, and each of these meetings is only 1 hour. Alissa

3 3

Strawman proposal finalization process
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 8, 2014

Oct. 8, 2014

As discussed in the thread about ICANN 51 side meetings, it seems like it would be helpful for us to develop a shared understanding of how we will assemble and finalize a unified transition proposal after we start receiving individual proposals from the operational communities and broader input from all stakeholders. My guess is that we will not come to a firm conclusion about all details of this process prior to ICANN 51, which is fine. But we certainly need to come to some conclusions about it within the next few months, so that we are prepared when we start receiving proposals from the operational communities and input from all stakeholders. I’ve put together a strawman proposal for a process to use to assemble and finalize a unified transition proposal (attached and in dropbox). It is heavily influenced by our charter. You will see that there are many open questions — I’m just throwing this out as a starting point to get discussion going. Please comment. I don’t think we need to document every little detail and possible corner case for how things might go once we start receiving proposals and input, but I do think we should have a rough plan that we can articulate to establish expectations about how we will proceed. Thanks, Alissa

7 9

Re: [Internal-cg] Independent Secretariat
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 8, 2014

Oct. 8, 2014

All, As you respond on this email thread, please refrain from quoting prior messages that include the names, scores, or any other information concerning specific secretariat candidates. Also, please refrain from mentioning the names, scores, or any other information concerning specific candidates on this public mailing list. We are working with ICANN on a solution such that we can discuss this confidential information within this group, but until we get that worked out we need to maintain candidate confidentiality. Thanks, Alissa

3 5

ICG FAQ - Final ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 8, 2014

Oct. 8, 2014

Dear All .. Please find attached, and in Dropbox, a clean final version of the ICG FAQ .. We still need to insert the referenced email address before developing a PDF version .. I have also inserted a link to the most recent 'Proposal Finalization Process' file .. not sure how this will work with future versions .. I understand that the answer to Q17 on coordination with the accountability process is not 100% agreed by everyone but I believe the last draft provided by Milton was quite accepted to move forward and continue the discussion .. Thank you all for your help and cooperation to get this out before the LA meeting .. Kind Regards --Manal -----Original Message----- From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2014 12:00 AM To: Russ Housley Cc: Manal Ismail; ICG Subject: RE: [Internal-cg] FAQ - Question 18, accountability > -----Original Message----- > From: Russ Housley [mailto:housley@vigilsec.com] I still worry a bit > about the ICG conducting an analysis. If the names community has > achieved consensus, the only question remaining for the ICG is to > determine if there are gaps. Disagree strongly. "Coordination" with the broader ICANN accountability process is required by the charter and we cannot coordinate if we do not analyze the accountability arrangements as a whole that are coming out of the OC proposals and liaise with them on its implications for their process. As noted in my previous message, if we don't do this we are risking the entire transition being derailed. Furthermore, we do have to assess accountability holistically, as each OC will develop plans independently. Just as we need to look for technical incompatibilities or oversights, we need to do that for accountability. It's not just the names community that has to worry about accountability, by the way. There are major issues with numbers, too.

2 1

Call#5 chat transcript - ICG Dinner ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 8, 2014

Oct. 8, 2014

Thought it may be useful to post this in a separate thread .. Just want to echo a few thoughts that were shared in call#5 chat room <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/transcript-chat-icg-01oct14 -en.pdf> regarding ICG dinner .. * Agree to benefits of having an ICG social event /informal gathering .. * Agree with those who felt the dinner is a bit expensive .. * Will still join if no other options are feasible .. * Agree to keep it an ICG dinner to encourage communication and engagement among ICG members .. Kind Regards --Manal

5 5

Re: [Internal-cg] FAQ - Question 18, accountability
by Milton L Mueller Oct. 7, 2014

Oct. 7, 2014

There are quite a few unresolved issues on question 18 regarding accountability. Also, in her comments on Question 12 Narelle seems to imply that the FAQ should not be saying anything at all about accountability, which I think is wrong. Let's go back to the relevant charter section. Here it is in full: "The IANA stewardship transition process is taking place alongside a parallel and related process on enhancing ICANN accountability. While maintaining the accountability of Internet identifier governance is central to both processes, this group's scope is focused on the arrangements required for the continuance of IANA functions in an accountable and widely accepted manner after the expiry of the NTIA-ICANN contract. Nevertheless, the two processes are interrelated and interdependent and should appropriately coordinate their work." This clearly means that we must: a) pay attention to whether the new arrangements proposed by the OCs provide sufficient accountability after the NTIA goes away - accountability is "central" to the process. b) coordinate with the other accountability process. c) recognize and somehow deal with the interdependence of the two processes. They are interdependent because _regardless of what the OC's propose_ many constituencies don't want the US to let go of IANA until they think ICANN as a whole has made sufficient reforms regarding accountability. Furthermore, Wolf-Ulrich has raised an important issue, namely that the ICANN enhanced accountability process almost certainly will take longer than our transition process needs to take. So how do we coordinate with a process that is probably on a more extended time frame than ours? On the other hand, people involved in the other process will likely oppose going forward with the transition unless they are satisfied that ICANN has either executed or is completely committed to sufficient reforms related to accountability. Worse, you all need to understand is that our final proposal will not just go to the NTIA, it will become meat for US Congressional committees to pick over, and that Congressional scrutiny will be more concerned ICANN accountability than with the IANA transition per se. Or, to put it differently, if the accountability elements of our final proposal are not deemed strong enough to let ICANN off the hook, and if the other ICANN accountability process is not finished yet, we can expect strong opposition to execution of our approved transition plan. Because of its role, the ICG will be right in the middle of the two processes, and this will probably prove to be one of the most difficult aspects of our task. We will need to discuss this a lot more in LA. With that in mind here is a proposed redraft of Q18 ---- 18. What is the relationship between the work of the ICG and the process concerning ICANN accountability? The ICG charter says that accountability is "central" to our process. The ICG has asked the operational communities to consider oversight and accountability in their proposals. After receiving consensus proposals from the operational communities regarding IANA, the ICG will conduct an analysis and assessment of their implications for ICANN accountability. At that point it will liaise with the ICANN accountability process and advise it on how the results of our process affects their requirements. ----- I think this modification addresses Russ's objections and Wolf-Ulrich's warning. It does not second-guess the OC results and it does not lock our results to the completion of the other accountability process, though it does try to coordinate them.

6 7

Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
by Joe Alhadeff Oct. 6, 2014

Oct. 6, 2014

While I generally agree that we do not need to provide definitions as a matter of course we do have to avoid confusion in our use of terms. Is there a belief that people would be unclear as to what we mean by IANA functions? There have been issues of functions that are specified in the contract or not. While our RFP does reference similar terms I am not sure that they are defined. That might be the role of an FAQ... ----- Original Message ----- From: paf(a)frobbit.se To: kuoweiwu(a)gmail.com Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 12:46:52 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. On 1 okt 2014, at 06:23, Patrik Fältström wrote: > Personally, I do not think we need to add definitions. It adds to the confusion. My apologies for not being more clear... Reason for this is that we already have an agreed to text in the RFP we have submitted. As Milton said on the call, we should have simple answers to simple repeated questions. Regarding "what is IANA", maybe we should just remove the question? Patrik _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

7 18

Re: [Internal-cg] FAQ - deadline for comments
by Elise Gerich Oct. 6, 2014

Oct. 6, 2014

Dear Manal, To be consistent with the rest of the document, question #7 should read: ³Does the IANA functions operator carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?² Regards, -- Elise From: Manal Ismail <manal(a)tra.gov.eg> Date: Monday, October 6, 2014 at 2:16 PM To: Alissa Cooper <alissa(a)cooperw.in> Cc: ICG <internal-cg(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] FAQ - deadline for comments > - modified question 7 to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than > names, number & protocol identifiers?" and would appreciate help in > listing IANA functions not under NTIA contact

2 1

Call for participation in CWG
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 6, 2014

Oct. 6, 2014

The cross-community working group developing a stewardship transition proposal for naming related functions had a conference call today. On that call I agreed to put a request out to all of you to please spread the word within your communities (particularly those outside of ICANN) about the call for participation in that group. An explanation of how to join the group is here: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-09-26-en Note that the term “participants” is now being used rather than “observers.” The group’s charter is here: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iana-stewardship-naming-function-charter-14…. People who are interested in joining the group can contact Grace Abuhamad (grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org) Please inform your communities. The CWG’s next meeting will be a face-to-face meeting at ICANN 51 on Monday, 13 October, 12:15 to 13:45 PDT. Thanks, Alissa

1 0

Versions and naming of documents
by Patrik Fältström Oct. 6, 2014

Oct. 6, 2014

All, I see in Dropbox that we have for many documents a good naming structure for the documents themselves, but when we later finally agree on a document, we seem to not be clear enough what version of the document is really the final. This is something ultimately our secretarial will take care of on our web site where "final" versions of the documents should be available, but until then, I encourage people to name documents with -FINAL in the name. Such as: topicarea-FINAL.doc topicarea-FINAL.pdf Patrik

4 5

Fwd: CWG to develop an IANA Stewardship Transition proposal on naming related functions and the work of the ICG
by Alissa Cooper Oct. 4, 2014

Oct. 4, 2014

I wanted to share the email exchange below with the ICG. Mohamed, Patrick and I were under the impression that the email we received from Jonathan and Byron was private correspondence, and I responded privately on behalf of the three of us accordingly, but it seems that the original message has been made public <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Letter+to+ICG+--+24+S…> so we wanted to make sure the ICG was aware of the full exchange. I will follow up with Jonathan and Byron so that we make sure to have clarity in the future about when communications are intended for the full ICG and when not. Alissa Begin forwarded message: > From: Alissa Cooper <alissa(a)cooperw.in> > Subject: Re: CWG to develop an IANA Stewardship Transition proposal on naming related functions and the work of the ICG > Date: September 25, 2014 at 10:17:35 AM PDT > To: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com>, <mbashir(a)mbash.net>, 'Patrik Falstrom -' <paf(a)frobbit.se> > Cc: Byron Holland <byron.holland(a)cira.ca>, <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de>, 'Milton Mueller -' <mueller(a)syr.edu>, 'James Bladel -' <jbladel(a)godaddy.com>, 'Keith Drazek -' <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>, 'Jon Nevett -' <jon(a)donuts.co>, <mnuduma(a)yahoo.com>, Martin Boyle <martin.boyle(a)nominet.org.uk>, "'Xiaodong Lee:'" <xl(a)cnnic.cn>, <keith(a)internetnz.net.nz> > > Jonathan, Byron, > > Thank you for the update. I realize that there have been extensive efforts put into developing a somewhat novel process on short order for the purposes of developing a transition proposal, and I very much appreciate the effort that you and your colleagues in the other constituencies have put into this. > > Regarding the timeline, we did designate January 15 (and all of the other milestones) as a “target” so as to acknowledge the potential need for some wiggle room on either side to accommodate unforeseen circumstances that may arise in the various communities. With that said, the January 15 target was deliberately chosen with the rest of the consultation and coordination steps in mind, and with a very strong emphasis on completion of the transition by September 30, 2015. As I noted at the first ICG meeting, I think the political likelihood of getting a second chance to transition after that date are extremely slim, and the ICG as a whole seems quite motivated to have the transition completed next year. > > As such, while small delays can probably accommodated, delays on the order of one month or more (e.g., from mid-January to mid-February) will present difficulties for the rest of the coordination process that the ICG has committed to, and could put a timely completion of the full transition at risk. I realize that face-to-face meetings have been a key mode of doing business in the past, but I would urge you to consider alternative methods for completing a transition proposal for names that would not require postponement until ICANN 52 if at all possible. If the processes in the operational communities get too far out of sync, the ICG may need to proceed with its coordination with only a subset of proposals to assemble and finalize. That would be far from an ideal situation. > > In any event, I’m very glad to hear that the CWG is getting started. Feel free to send RFP questions if you have them. > > Thanks, > Alissa > > > On 9/24/14, 7:00 AM, "Jonathan Robinson" <jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com> wrote: > > Dear Alissa, Patrik, Mohamed, > > We are taking this opportunity to write you, given our previous roles as co-chairs of the of the drafting team that prepared the charter for the Cross Community Working Group (CWG) to develop an IANA Stewardship Transition proposal on naming related functions. We want to update you on the progress we have made and make one important comment on the timelines set out in the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group Request for Proposals (RFP) published on September 8 2014. > > We in the naming community have followed the historic IANA transition process very closely. Mindful of the challenging timelines inherent in the process, we have moved very quickly to come together as a naming community. At ICANN 50 in London in June 2014, the GNSO, ccNSO, ALAC and the SSAC came together to establish a drafting team to prepare a charter for what will become the CWG. Through frequent meetings, we were pleased to be able to finalise a charter for the CWG by mid-August 2014. The charter has been approved by the GNSO, ccNSO, ALAC and SSAC, each in accordance with its own rules and procedures, and we are now calling for volunteers as members and observers, again according to each SO and AC’s rules and procedures. In addition, the GAC has been invited to participate in the CWG and is actively considering the invitation. With the establishment of the CWG, we expect to be able to provide a proposal from the naming community. > > While we believe that we have made a good start, ensuring the engagement of such a broad community in such an important and overarching exercise is necessarily time consuming. Even though many of the chartering SO/AC’s have yet to complete their procedures for selecting working group members, we have nevertheless decided to move forward and schedule our first CWG meeting right before (as well as a second meeting during) ICANN 51 in Los Angeles. After this initial F2F meeting, we may not have another opportunity to meet face to face until ICANN 52 in February. We would not anticipate that the CWG itself could approve a transition proposal without at least one such face to face meeting and potentially a public consultation of the community. Please also be aware that before a proposal could be formally transmitted to the ICG, it will also be necessary for the chartering SO/AC’s to approve it through their respective processes. > > Therefore, while we intend to urge that the CWG devote considerable time and energy to developing a proposal, it will be quite challenging, some would say impossible, to meet the January 15, 2015 target deadline for formal proposals set out in the ICG’s RFP. We do hope that shortly upon formation of the CWG we will be able to come back to you with a proposed timetable. It follows that the CWG will not be in a position to review the RFP or request any clarifications by the deadline of 24 September, but hopefully you are willing to accommodate any questions that the CWG may have following its formation. > > The CWG’s charter provides for a very open process, including no limitations on observers (regardless of affiliation) at any of our meetings. We have no doubt that the naming community members on the ICG will actively monitor the work of our CWG and provide the ICG with regular updates on our progress. Should you have any questions or require further clarification, we would be pleased hear from you and to respond accordingly. > > Sincerely, > > > Jonathan Robinson & Byron Holland > Co-Chairs > Drafting Team of the Charter for a CWG to develop an IANA stewardship transition proposal

3 5

Links to documents & archives
by Alice Jansen Oct. 2, 2014

Oct. 2, 2014

Dear ICG Members, For your information - Below you will find links to call #5 archives (see - https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icg-archives-2014-07-31-en) Agenda - https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/agenda-icg-01oct14-en.pdf Chat transcript - https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/transcript-chat-icg-01oct14-en.… Recording EN - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-01oct14-en.mp3 Recording FR - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-01oct14-fr.mp3 Recording ES - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-01oct14-es.mp3 Recording RU - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-01oct14-ru.mp3 Recording PT - Due to unforeseen circumstances, the Portuguese interpreters Team was unable to join the ICG call #5 today. We have checked with our conferencing services - no observer joined the PT line. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. Rest assured that a PT transcript will be provided. Recording ZH - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-01oct14-zh.mp3 Recording AR - http://audio.icann.org/meetings/coordination-group/icg-01oct14-ar.mp3 Transcripts of the audio recordings will be posted as soon as available. The meeting request announcement was published on 29 September - see https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2014-09-29-en and is referenced on your ICG activities page at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icg-activities-2014-07-18-en Your ICANN 51 meeting schedule can be found at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/icg-losangeles51-schedule-01oct… and is posted on the ICG activities page at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icg-activities-2014-07-18-en The links to icgproposal(a)icann.org<mailto:icgproposal@icann.org> public archives - http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/icg-proposal/ - and to icg-meetingrequest(a)icann.org<applewebdata://A2F39726-6303-4829-AA86-BC16C136E40E/icg-meetingrequest@icann.org> public archives - http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/icg-meetingrequest/- are now available on the ICG activities page at: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icg-activities-2014-07-18-en Best regards Alice

2 1

Remarks of Assistant Secretary Strickling at The Media Institute ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

Thought this may be of interest to the group .. http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocum ent&orgId=102898&topicId=235950016&docId=l:2213343597&isRss=true&Em=4&md 5=&sendDate=20140930 Kind Regards --Manal

1 0

Minutes of 6 and 17 September ICG meetings
by Samantha Dickinson Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

I have placed the drafts of the September face-to-face meeting and teleconference minutes on Dropbox in the minutes folder: <https://www.dropbox.com/s/2swcl5wjsyx5hsj/minutes-second-f2f-meeting-6-sept…> <https://www.dropbox.com/s/a28a0p6spz2gtpe/minutes-teleconference-17-septemb…> Please note that both sets of minutes use the new style of separating out decisions and actions made at the meeting. Regards -- Samantha Dickinson Internet governance consultant & writer Lingua Synaptica

4 3

ICG FAQ V2 ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

Dear All .. Please find attached, and in Dropbox, I new version reflecting our discussion on the call and comments received over email, to the extent possible .. Please note that I have re-numbered the questions to accommodate the 2 new ones, so please take care when referring to question numbers as they may not be the same any more .. I believe the following highlights may be useful in reviewing this version of the document .. I can see that the following 2 questions still need further discussion: Q#5 on IANA, with the following suggestions on the table: - A new draft of the question and its answer - whether to delete the question - And a range of suggestions regarding definitions, reference documents, functions within the contract, and those beyond Q#16 on coordination with accountability process - Redraft of the question - Concern about locking our timeline with the results of the ICANN enhanced accountability process - Debate on ICG will conducting an analysis of their [the received proposals] overall implications for ICANN accountability On the other hand, regarding the following 2 additional questions, kindly note that: Q#3 on ICG secretariat - I have tried to redraft this one to focus more on ICG independence Q#11 on submitting individual proposals - I have replaced the last sentence with this: "But, of course, this will be possible only if you have already participated in the process convened by the relevant operational community." The rest of the changes are hopefully straight forward .. Appreciate if you can either use track changes or, like Patrik mentioned, send the exact text proposed for further iterations .. Kind Regards --Manal

1 0

Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
by Joe Alhadeff Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

There are two questions related to accountability. One is within the processes of IANA and then the overall ICANN accountability. We certainly need to have an opinion on the former, and to the extent that the the NTIA transition is replaced by some the ICANN accountability mechanism, then it should not be out of bounds for us to have an opinion as it may impact the overall oversight/accountability of the IANA accountability functions. ----- Original Message ----- From: housley(a)vigilsec.com To: internal-cg(a)icann.org Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 6:06:34 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. I have two concerns. Q4: I do not like defining IANA is this way. It makes it seem that IANA would not exist if not for the contract. Clearly, we want it to continue when the contract goes away, and some IANA functions are completely outside the contract. For example, the IANA role in the Timezone Database is completely outside the contract. I realize the definition includes "other" functions, but think we want to avoid using the contract as a means of defining IANA. Q14: If the ICANN community comes to consensus on a plan that includes accountability mechanisms, who is the ICG to "conduct an analysis of their overall implications for ICANN accountability?" I have a real problem saying that ICG will do this. The ICANN community needs to say whether the accountability mechanisms are sufficient, not the ICG. Making sure there are not gaps between the proposals is a different matter, but that is not what the current text says. Russ _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

1 0

Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
by Joe Alhadeff Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

I was providing these as examples of better, more coherent definitions. I have never liked citing to Wikipedia as the authoritative definition... I would also caution how exhaustive our definitions should be. ----- Original Message ----- From: narelle.clark(a)accan.org.au To: paf(a)frobbit.se, kuoweiwu(a)gmail.com Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 2:50:54 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. I hesitate to say that it is often best to point to an authoritative source for definitions, rather than come up with one's own. It may be safer and easier to do that here, ie point to a full definition elsewhere and have the shortest, most succinct version on our FAQ we can. Narelle > -----Original Message----- > From: internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] > On Behalf Of Patrik Fältström > Sent: Wednesday, 1 October 2014 2:23 PM > To: Wu Kuo-Wei > Cc: internal-cg(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. > > In general, if people want questions and/or answers added to the FAQ, please > do type and do send text. Not until people do so we can discuss whether it is to > be added. > > Personally, I do not think we need to add definitions. It adds to the confusion. > > Specifically terms like "The IANA Database" that I honestly have no idea what it > is. > > The important thing is for whoever is sending things *to* us makes clear what > they mean with whatever terminology they use. > > Patrik > > On 1 okt 2014, at 06:01, Wu Kuo-Wei <kuoweiwu(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I will suggest to describe all about IANA function (provide NTIA’s contract and > other for “complete” information). > > > > Kuo Wu > > > > Keith Davidson <keith(a)internetnz.net.nz> 於 2014/10/1 9:13 寫道： > > > >> I would go further, and suggest we should have working definitions for: > >> > >> The IANA Function > >> The IANA Database > >> The IANA Operator (or IANA Functions Operator) > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> Keith > >> > >> On 1/10/2014 3:02 a.m., joseph alhadeff wrote: > >>> I think our IANA definition is confusing. IANA is an acronym that > >>> should be included in the definmtion and then we should describe > >>> functions that fall under that work. I looked at some definitions > >>> from What Is and Wikipedia which i attach... > >>> On 9/30/2014 9:06 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > >>>> > >>>> *From:* Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg] > >>>> > >>>> [MI]: Noted .. will add it to the new version that is to be > >>>> circulated shortly .. Although, personally, I would be reluctant to > >>>> leave the last sentence "But the ICG cannot give these objections > >>>> any weight if the person made no effort to participate in the > >>>> operational community-convened process." .. I think it's a bit > >>>> negative and I don't think it adds .. > >>>> > >>>> JPerhaps it does sound a bit negative, but I don’t want people to > >>>> get the (wrong) idea that they can short-circuit the process and > >>>> appeal to us to get their ideas implemented. Can you think of a > >>>> better way to phrase it? > >>>> > >>>> Milton L. Mueller > >>>> > >>>> Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor > >>>> > >>>> Syracuse University School of Information Studies > >>>> > >>>> http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/mueller/Home.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Internal-cg mailing list > >>>> Internal-cg(a)icann.org > >>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Internal-cg mailing list > >>> Internal-cg(a)icann.org > >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Internal-cg mailing list > >> Internal-cg(a)icann.org > >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Internal-cg mailing list > > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

1 0

ICG FAQ ..
by Manal Ismail Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

Dear All .. Please find attached, and in dropbox, a draft FAQ we (Martin, Patrik, Mohamed, Alissa & myself) have prepared to be discussed on the upcoming call .. This is supposed to be a living document .. So the target is to come up with an initial agreed version rather than an exhaustive complete one .. Looking forward to receiving your feedback over email and/or during the call .. Kind Regards --Manal

16 31

Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
by WUKnoben Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

Following our call today I have inserted my comments in the text (see attached). Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: WUKnoben Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 11:43 PM To: Manal Ismail Cc: Coordination Group Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. Thanks Manal and the other colleagues having prepared this draft. My comments: Q#2: “direct” and “indirect” stakeholders should be explained; maybe “direct stakeholders have an operational relationship to the IANA functions operator”. Q#91/2: I think this should be phrased more firm rather than discussing options the ICG might have or not (...all the ICG can do...). Agree with Manal that we shall express what we shall do rather than what we cannot. Q#14: here we definitely lock our timeline with the results of the ICANN enhanced accountability process. This could be a long lasting story. Will this serve as excuse for not meeting the deadline Sep 2015? Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Manal Ismail Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 9:33 PM To: Kavouss Arasteh ; Alissa Cooper ; Patrik Fältström ; Mohamed El Bashir Cc: Coordination Group Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. Dear Mr. Arasteh .. Allow me to re-iterate my reply to you regarding your very important questions .. “I believe the excellent points you raise below should be addressed through the proposals we are expecting to receive .. I do not think we should pre-empt what the community will ultimately reach and express views through this FAQ ..” In other words, those questions will be answered in the proposals submitted to the ICG .. Looking forward to receiving your reply to the above .. I’m sure there are ICG members more capable of replying to your points on IANA .. Kind Regards --Manal From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 8:20 PM To: Manal Ismail; Alissa Cooper; Patrik Fältström; Mohamed El Bashir Cc: Milton L Mueller; Martin Boyle; Coordination Group Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. Manal Alissa,Patrik,mohamed Others I disagree with Patrik that I should draft questions for the points that I raised Alissia decided to assign the prepartion of FAQ to Manal and Martin AND THEN WE RECEIVED THE DRAFR PREPARED. Now I have made three rounds of questions .those who were assighned/ designated to prepare the draft of FAQ are kindly requested to put my points in the propoer questions usuing the style that was utilized before. I am awaiting for these very important questions to be answered Moreover ,pls clarify what do you mean by " I do not disagree that the IANA Department at ICANN does more than the contract with NTIA describes. What the ICG is discussing is replacing the stewardship by NTIA for the IANA functions that the NTIA oversees. The functions that NTIA oversees are described in the contract and those are the only activities done by the IANA department that have oversight by NTIA. Any other, non-contractual activities of the IANA department which may be described in SAC-067 have no contractual relationship with NTIA and it stewardship" . 1 Please advise what what are the actions that IANA Department at ICANN does more than the contract with NTIA : 2Please also describe what are the IANA functions that NTIA oversight ?Please cut and paste them from the contract as during the PUBLIC MEETING we could not refer to the contract as many people may not know that 3,After transition who will oversight those actions? 4. What are those other, non-contractual activities of the IANA department which may be described in SAC-067 have no contractual relationship with NTIA and it stewardship"? 5. After transition who will perform that : Regards Kavouss . 2014-09-30 19:36 GMT+02:00 Manal Ismail <manal(a)tra.gov.eg>: From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu] From: Martin Boyle [mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk] For Q15, Manal is right about running behind the moving train. But I now realise that the answer is very ICANN centric! In part this is corrected in the next question, but I would suggest that this question should look at the operational communities and those directly engaged with them (GAC, ALAC...), while the next question could then refer to addressing those who do not take part, but will be affected - the business community, ccTLDs that are not in ICANN etc MM: It seems then that the “real” answer to this question is that the Operational communities themselves should play a major role in the outreach to relevant non-ICANN communities MI: I fully agree .. and that’s why I suggested to add “Inclusiveness/Outreach – check the level of inclusiveness and outreach of the provided process” to the criteria of individual proposals assessment, to make sure the Operational communities considers this seriously and play an active/proactive role in outreach .. _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

1 0

Call # 5 - Roll Call
by Alice Jansen Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

Dear ICG Members, Please flag any inconsistencies you may notice (off list). We will share call archives as soon as available. Thanks! Best regards Alice ICG Members: Adiel Akplogan (NRO) Kavouss Arasteh (GAC) Jari Arkko (IETF) James Bladel (GNSO) Martin Boyle (ccNSO) Narelle Clark (ISOC) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Keith Davidson (ccNSO) Jandyr Dos Santos (GAC) Heather Dryden (GAC) Patrik Fältström (SSAC) Demi Getschko (ISOC) Hartmut Glaser (ASO) Russ Housley (IAB) Manal Ismail (GAC) Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (GNSO) Xiaodong Lee (ccNSO) Milton Mueller (GNSO) Russ Mundy (SSAC) Jon Nevett (gTLD Registries) Michael Niebel (GAC) Lynn St Amour (IAB) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC) Mary Uduma (ccNSO) Liaisons: Kuo-Wei Wu (Board Liaison) Apologies ICG: Joseph Alhadeff (ICC-BASIS) Mohamed El Bashir (ALAC) Keith Drazek (gTLD Registries) Elise Gerich (IANA staff Expert Liaison) Daniel Karrenberg (RSSAC) Lars-Johan Liman (RSSAC) Paul Wilson (NRO) Support: Samantha Dickinson Alice Jansen Ergys Ramaj Apologies Support: Hillary Jett Theresa Swinehart

1 0

Draft list of action items and decisions from 1 October teleconference for ICG review
by Samantha Dickinson Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

Actions: Below is a list of the draft action items and decision from today's teleconference for the review of ICG members: 1. Jansen to publish minutes of 17 September teleconference on website 2. Cooper to leave discussion on ICG-related events at ICANN 51 open on the internal-cg mailing list for a couple more days to enable ICG members to add anything else they think should be on the list or should be modified on the existing list. 3. Clark to submit edits to the answer to the ICG FAQ question 1, “What is the ICG” as well as a possible question and placeholder answer about the definition of “global multistakeholder community” 4. Contents of Question 2.5 of FAQ, on ICG Secretariat, to be resolved on the mailing list, perhaps by refocusing it to be about the independence of the ICG itself. 5. Ismail to work on a second formulation of Question 3 of the FAQ based on feedback from Mueller, Subrenat and Bladel. 6. Discussion about remainder of FAQ, from Question 4 onward, to be discussed by the ICG on the mailing list. Decision: 1. ICG to publish a version of the ICG FAQ online before ICANN 51, making it clear that it is a living document. -- Samantha Dickinson Internet governance consultant & writer Lingua Synaptica

1 0

REMINDER - 1 October - ICG Call #5
by Alice Jansen Oct. 1, 2014

Oct. 1, 2014

Dear ICG Members, This is to kindly remind you that your ICG call #5 is scheduled for: **Wednesday, 1 October** at 04:00-05:00 UTC See timezone conversion at: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ICG+Call+%235&iso=… Note that an announcement was published on the ICANN website yesterday and may be found at: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-09-22-en Call details were emailed to you in off-list notifications. You should also have received an outlook calendar invite which includes the call details. In you cannot find them, please send me an email (off-list) and I will make sure to send you a copy prior to the call. Documents will be projected in the virtual meeting room - https://icann.adobeconnect.com/icg. To avoid echo, please make sure to mute your computer speakers as live audio from the meeting is being broadcast from the virtual meeting room. If you plan to use Skype to join the bridge, see attached instructions on how to mute the virtual meeting room. Note that the virtual meeting room will also be used to monitor the queue. To join the queue, press the "raise your hand" icon in the Adobe Connect room: [cid:3364EF36-9D4D-489F-A6D3-131BC32AE69B] If you are not in a position to join the virtual meeting room today, please let me know. Should you wish to follow the meeting in a different language, please note that AR, ES, FR, RU, ZH and PT interpretation services are available for this call. Note, however, that as indicated in the call details, the FR booth will interpret from English into French only. The agenda circulated by Alissa will be available in the virtual meeting room: * Minutes approval for Sept 17 call - https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7x5poce3wb8ffsv/AACVxjRGvva_U15ix7dl4I-ia/Minute… * Review ICANN 51 schedule and logistics - https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7x5poce3wb8ffsv/AAAaLTRA8tOApp7SlA_t0fKaa/ICANN5… * Discussion of FAQ - https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7x5poce3wb8ffsv/AABQYGtLVj8PvlG9NkX0T87wa/FAQ/IC… We would be very grateful if you could also state your name when speaking as the call will be recorded, transcribed and interpreted. As always, please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or concerns. Thanks, Best regards Alice

2 1