September 2014 - Internal-cg

FYI: ICG Call #4 - Call Details
by Patrik Fältström Sept. 16, 2014

Sept. 16, 2014

All, here are the detailed instructions for the call on Sept 17 at 21:30-22:30 UTC. Patrik Begin forwarded message: > From: Alice Jansen <alice.jansen(a)icann.org> > Subject: ICG Call #4 - Call Details > Date: 16 september 2014 03:44:02 GMT-4 > To: Patrik Fältström <paf(a)frobbit.se> > > Dear Patrik, > > ICG call #4 will be held on: > > **Wednesday, 17 September 2014** > 21:30-22:30 UTC > See timezone conversion at: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ICG+Call+%234&iso=… > > Audio/Bridge > Dial-in numbers: http://adigo.com/icann/ > Conference ID: 92957255 > Please do not share pin details of this bridge. Observers will be able to listen to the audio of this bridge via the virtual meeting room. > We would be very grateful if you could state your name when speaking as the call will be recorded, transcribed and interpreted. > > Language Services > Should you wish to participate in the call using a different language, please see below: > Dial-in numbers: http://adigo.com/icann/ > AR – Conference ID: 82855066 > ES - Conference ID: 68385764 > FR - Conference ID: 75929475 > PT – Conference ID: 759752 > RU – Conference ID: 345720 > ZH – Conference ID: 825702 > These bridge details will be made available to the global multistakeholder community. The operator will mute any lines that are not ICG members to avoid any potential disruption. ICG members who have joined bridge AR, bridge ES, bridge PT, bridge RU or bridge ZH will be able to voice their comments/questions in their language, which will be simultaneously interpreted into English. Due to unforeseen circumstances, the FR booth will interpret from English into French only. > > Virtual Meeting Room - https://icann.adobeconnect.com/icg/ > Audio of the EN bridge will be broadcast via the virtual meeting room. To avoid echo, please make sure to mute your computer speakers. If you plan to use Skype to join the bridge, see attached instructions on how to mute the virtual meeting room. > Documents will be projected in the virtual meeting room (insert your name and join as guest). > 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: > > > > Dial-out Request > Should you need a dial out, please let me know by Wednesday, 17 September - 20:00 UTC. > > As always, feel free to contact me should you have any questions or concerns. I will send an outlook calendar invite in a separate email. > > Very best regards > > Alice

1 0

Telephone conference on Sep 17 will be at 21:30 UTC
by Patrik Fältström Sept. 16, 2014

Sept. 16, 2014

Hi, The call will be Sept 17 at 21:30 UTC. Agenda will be sent out shortly, but main topic is the consensus document as announced earlier. Details on call will be sent out by our Support Staff. Patrik

1 0

Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building discussion
by Kavouss Arasteh Sept. 15, 2014

Sept. 15, 2014

Dear All, Allow me to share some thoughts with you First of all, It is surprising and astonishing that I was mistakenly and wrongly and unfairly quoted that to be against consensus That is an unfounded, wrong and untrue quotation and/or interpretation of what I have said or what I am thinking I am and have been and I will always be in favour of consensus That is a tradition and past and present and future practice. I was also mistakenly and wrongly and unfairly quoted to opt for voting That is also another unfounded, wrong and untrue quotation and/or interpretation of what I have said or what I am thinking These are pure allegation and hostile positions Everybody who knows me is aware that I am always looking to find a compromise for any problem I therefore categorically and strongly reject such an interpretation wrongly made by media and by those who wish to give a wrong image of me. Now coming to the second round of consensus building process initiated by me on 06 September after formal ICG meeting in G11 and now circulating within the entire ICG The issue is not who is right and who is not right. The issue is we have to negotiate and come to agreement or consensus. Please therefore kindly not refer that X IS RIGHT or Y IS NOT RIGHT Some of you insisting that their views be accepted by others .That is not consensus building .That is dominating other’s views . Negotiation implies that we give something if we wish to get some thing We cannot expect that we get everything without giving up some thing The case by case approach that I propose is a workable approach since we still do not know which are the subjects that we may agree or disagree .In one case we could have option x of arriving at consensus and in other case may be option Y to do so. Let us avoid establishing rules upfront before dealing with an issue. ICG does not merely deal with technical issues such as those being dealt with by some operational communities as other operational communities have had different mechanism to achieve consensus Consequently,: 1. be ready to be negotiable, and tolerable 2. agree to the case by case concept 3. agree to limit the inclusion of one possible example as already included and not give another example rather take approach of some of you proposing that chair and vice chairs shall make their utmost efforts to explore way and means in finding appropriate mechanism to achieve consensus or to reach consensus ,on a case by case 4. agree not to refer to quorum 5.agree not to refer to simple minority 6.agree not to refer to rough or soft consensus 7.agree to refer to the possibility of absentees ICG members to make comments when other ICG considering an issue for decision making 8.agree that chair ,in consultation with vice chair opt for some sort of temperature measuring process to find out the sense and9or direction or trend of the ICG mood in discussing issues 9.agree that if the essence of your view points is taken not insisting for the full text that you have proposed. 10. maintain and practice the spirit of collaboration and cooperation and be ready to negotiate and join consensus TKS KAVOUSS 2014-09-09 19:56 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com>: > Dear Wolf > Dear Joe > Dear all, > Please be fair with me. > I have taken the essence and thrust of Joe, s proposal relating to > absentees of members at ICG meeting in two circumstances as he described > and I took his proposal relating yo exploring all other possible options > than the one I put in the draft > Kavouss > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 9 Sep 2014, at 17:17, "WUKnoben" <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de> > wrote: > > Joe, > > you’re right. I’ve seen some of your edits taken by Kavouss in a condensed > form but not all of them. > Certainly you should be given the opportunity to comment on this revision > again. > > Best regards > > Wolf-Ulrich > > *From:* joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff(a)oracle.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 09, 2014 3:16 PM > *To:* internal-cg(a)icann.org > *Subject:* Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building discussion > > Wolf: > > I had added some language on decisions where parties are not present in > the comments I had made to the last round as a reflection of our > conversation and replacement of the concept of quorum. > > Joe > On 9/9/2014 5:20 AM, WUKnoben wrote: > > Dear Heather, > > I attach > - the version presented at the Istanbul meeting > - the version amended by Kavouss based on the discussion after the meeting > - my amendments/comments to this > > I hope it helps understanding our status of discussion. > > Best regards > > Wolf-Ulrich > > > *From:* Heather.Dryden(a)ic.gc.ca > *Sent:* Monday, September 08, 2014 9:53 PM > *To:* wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de ; kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com > *Cc:* Internal-cg(a)icann.org > *Subject:* Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building discussion > > Thank you Wolf-Ulrich. Unfortunately, I missed the discussion group that > met after the ICG meetings concluded so I appreciate having a copy of the > latest version of the consensus document and the chance to compare and > consider its contents before finalizing the document on the Sep. 17 call. > > Heather > > > *From*: WUKnoben [mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de > <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de>] > *Sent*: Monday, September 08, 2014 09:41 PM > *To*: Kavouss Arasteh mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com > <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> > *Cc*: Coordination Group mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org > <Internal-cg(a)icann.org> > *Subject*: Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building discussion > > All, > > let me first say that the discussion in the after-meeting-session (“G11”) > was helpful for better understanding as well as moving ahead towards an > agreement about the consensus building process. Thanks again to Manal to > sum up the essential points made. And thanks to Kavouss as the G11 > coordinator. > > As it deemed to be necessary and for fairness reasons I’ve made a > comparison between the document version which has been on the table when we > cut the discussion last Saturday and the last one Kavouss has edited. > > Please find the result attached. As we agreed to Patriks proposal to use a > significant part of the next call on 17 Sep to (finally) discuss the > process it should be diligently prepared. > > Best regards > > Wolf-Ulrich > > > *From:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> > *Sent:* Monday, September 08, 2014 4:42 PM > *To:* WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de> > *Cc:* Manal Ismail <manal(a)tra.gov.eg> ; Mary Uduma <mnuduma(a)yahoo.com> ; Jari > Arkko <jari.arkko(a)piuha.net> ; Coordination Group <Internal-cg(a)icann.org> > *Subject:* Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building discussion > > Dear All, > I have considered and to a great extent taken into account all of your > comments > I therefore created a clean version called V1 after 08 Sept. > Please consider this clean version and > 1 make any editorial /language improvement > 2 make minimum changes as we may not finish if we start again to redraft. > There is a requirement that first and foremost every body feel comfortable > then at least every body equally uncomfortable . > Kavouss > > > > 2014-09-08 15:51 GMT+02:00 WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de>: > >> And thanks to Manal for this very good summary! >> >> >> >> Best regards >> >> Wolf-Ulrich >> >> >> *From:* Manal Ismail <manal(a)tra.gov.eg> >> *Sent:* Sunday, September 07, 2014 1:29 PM >> *To:* Mary Uduma <mnuduma(a)yahoo.com> ; Jari Arkko <jari.arkko(a)piuha.net> >> ; Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> >> *Cc:* ICG <internal-cg(a)icann.org> >> *Subject:* Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building discussion >> >> >> Dear All .. >> >> >> >> As one of those who have attended the ‘consensus building’ discussion >> during the coffee break after the meeting, allow me to clarify that more >> than 10 ICG members joined the discussion and almost everyone agreed that: >> >> - Utmost efforts should be exerted to reach consensus .. >> >> - Not reaching consensus would weaken the proposal submitted to >> the NTIA >> >> - A situation where one person can block the whole process >> should be avoided >> >> - Minority views, no matter how few, should be evaluated >> qualitatively (based on the merit of the objections) not quantitatively >> (based on the number of objections) >> >> - Consensus here refers to decisions related to the handling >> and assembling of submitted proposals not decisions related to >> approval/disapproval of content of the proposals (which if needed may then >> be referred back to the relevant communities) >> >> >> >> ICG members who were present agreed in principle on the proposal >> suggested by Mr Arasteh, which basically: >> >> - Stresses the need for reaching consensus >> >> - Delete the controversial minority/quorum part of the text >> from this part >> >> - Defer decision on how to handle the unlikely situation of not >> being able to reach a consensus way forward, to be decided upon on a case >> by case basis >> >> - List examples of alternative means that ICG may choose to >> follow .. this includes the text on minority as well as the IETF document, >> circulated by Jari, that describes the rough consensus process, >> particularly how to deal with different opinions >> >> >> >> So apologies to those who were not in the room and did not have the >> chance to attend .. >> >> Hope this summary, subject to corrections or additions by other present >> colleagues, provides the necessary background to put us all on the same >> page .. >> >> Thanks to Mr Arasteh for the suggested text and to all ICG members who >> were present for the constructive exchange .. >> >> >> >> Kind Regards >> >> --Manal >> >> >> >> *From:* internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto: >> internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Mary Uduma >> *Sent:* Sunday, September 07, 2014 3:21 AM >> *To:* Jari Arkko; Kavouss Arasteh >> *Cc:* ICG >> *Subject:* Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building discussion >> >> >> >> >> >> Jari , Arasteh and All, >> >> >> >> Kindly make it easier for us to follow the trend of discussions with >> correct documents. I was about to congratulate the Group of 11 (G11) and >> all ICG members when Alice's mail came in with the old version of the >> document. It is a bit confusing. >> >> >> >> I think we have progressed positively with the G11's version and >> formulations, please let us not go back to the old version, reason being >> that ICG members are errand boys of the communities. The power to object >> regarding any part of the proposal to NTIA is with each of the >> communities. >> >> >> >> In addition, the version looks balanced, what is left will be to do the >> minor edits and remove some redundant words and paragraphs like: >> >> >> 1. Purpose: >> " Laison " should read 'Liaison' in the second paragraph. >> >> 2. Individual/Group Behavior and Norms: >> Last paragraph 1st sentence should read : >> >> Public comments received as a result of any forum held by the ICG in >> relation to its activities should be duly considered and carefully >> analyzed. >> >> >> 3. Last para in 4b after the bullet points should read >> ''Following these basic principles, the chair will be responsible for >> designating each ICG position as one of the following;' >> >> 4. 4b under Recommendation >> ......cannot be reach-.... should read ....cannot be reached....... >> The two paragraphs after the last bullet point are no longer necessary, >> they should be deleted. >> >> >> Safe trip everyone. >> >> Mary Uduma >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 2:09 AM, Mary Uduma <mnuduma(a)yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> OOOOsh!!!! >> >> >> >> Sleeping and typing, hit the wrong botton. >> >> >> >> Please ignore my last unfinished mail. >> >> >> >> Mary >> >> >> >> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 2:07 AM, Mary Uduma <mnuduma(a)yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Jari , Arasteh and All, >> >> >> >> Kindly make it easier for us to follow. I was about to congratulate the >> Group of 11 (G11) and all ICG members when Alice's mail came in with the >> old version. >> >> >> >> I think we have progressed positively with the G11's version, please let >> us not go back to the old version, reason being that ICG members are errand >> boys of the communities. The power to object regarding any part of the >> proposal to NTIA is with each communities. >> >> >> >> In addition, the version looks balanced, what is left will be to do the >> minor edits and remove some redundant words like: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, September 6, 2014 11:21 PM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko(a)piuha.net> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> And in the after-the-meeting discussion I promised to send a link to the >> IETF document that describes the rough consensus process. Here: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7282 >> >> (for the purposes of the ICG decision process, the important bit is how >> we deal with differing opinions, not the humming. so read it in that light.) >> >> Jari >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 listInternal-cg@icann.orghttps://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 > >

6 37

Meetings at ICANN in L.A. -- input requested
by Patrik Fältström Sept. 15, 2014

Sept. 15, 2014

All, After exploring the possibilities, looking at the schedule etc, the current status of meetings in L.A. is as follows. Please note the question regarding silent observers below!! Input is appreciated. Constituency Travel have just been informed about the meeting Friday October 17, so those of you that do have funding from ICANN in one way or another will get your travel changed. Thursday October 16 10:30 - 12:00 Public discussion There will be interpretation to all UN languages. We are looking at how to place chairs etc in the room. The consensus I saw on this list was that all ICG members in L.A. should be on the stage (whatever that means), and I am looking at alternatives together with Meeting Team on how to accommodate that. Friday October 17 09:00 - 17:30 Working Session There will be interpretation to all UN languages. Seating will be in a U-shaped table. We do have space for max 80 silent observers. Question: Should we allow silent observers? Patrik

19 21

Draft minutes of 19 and 26 August teleconferences
by Samantha Dickinson Sept. 12, 2014

Sept. 12, 2014

Hello all Apologies for the delay in getting the draft minutes through. Because there weren't folders in Dropbox for the specific teleconference dates, I've created a new folder called "Minutes" and placed the draft minutes there. The link is: <https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7x5poce3wb8ffsv/AAAHtqRphmgHpel4kdh3Nccna/Minutes> Please note that I have not yet extracted action items from the 19 August 2014 teleconference. I notice that as a group, there doesn't seem to be much interest in following a more structured model of specifically noting action items as the meeting is underway and reviewing open action items at the beginning of the following meeting. Instead, the ICG agendas tends too follow the larger issues that are detailed in the more specific action items I've been extracting. ICG members therefore may wish to request that the minutes no longer attempt to extract action items from the general discussion. Regards -- Samantha Dickinson Internet governance consultant & writer Lingua Synaptica

2 3

Doodle poll for two (2) telephone conferences
by Patrik Fältström Sept. 12, 2014

Sept. 12, 2014

All, Here is the Doodle poll that I promised that is about the two next telephone calls before our meeting in Los Angeles. As agreed, the first is around 20:00 UTC on Sep 17, and the 2nd around 04:00 UTC on Oct 1. The first is in fact the earliest starting at 20:00 as the interpreters for FR is having another call until 20:00, so we can not start earlier than 20:00. Please mark your availability with "yes"/"maybe"/"no" at the following web page: <http://doodle.com/3xuuv4vawv5hrn56> Responses no later than 23:59 UTC on Monday Sep 15. Patrik Fältström

5 9

FYI - RfP Translations
by Alice Jansen Sept. 12, 2014

Sept. 12, 2014

Dear ICG Members, For your information, translation of the RfP are now available: * FR:https://www.icann.org/fr/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… * ES:https://www.icann.org/es/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… * RU:https://www.icann.org/ru/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… * AR:https://www.icann.org/ar/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… * PT:https://www.icann.org/pt/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… * ZH:https://www.icann.org/zh/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14… They were posted on your announcement - https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-09-09-en - and activities - https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icg-activities-2014-07-18-en - pages yesterday. Thanks, Best regards Alice

1 0

Re: [Internal-cg] Posting of draft RFP
by Narelle Clark Sept. 11, 2014

Sept. 11, 2014

I understood this was going out for comment. Saying it is 'subject to change' is not the same as 'does your community consider this form of words will adequately capture the input you need to give?'. It's an RFC on the RFP. -- Narelle Clark Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg(a)ripe.net> wrote: On 5.09.14 9:01 , Patrik Fältström wrote: > All, > > As you have noticed ICANN posted an announcement as a result of a request to have the draft RFP posted, for transparency reasons. I am working with ICANN on coming up with issues that makes this clear. On my own initiative I have just sent the following to ianatransition(a)icann.org where I saw the announcement: "Be aware that this text has not been formally agreed by the ICG yet. It is a very very stable draft, but changes may still occur before it is agreed. Daniel" _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

3 2

thoughts on where we are with the transition
by Jari Arkko Sept. 11, 2014

Sept. 11, 2014

FYI - thoughts from me on the transition. http://www.ietf.org/blog/2014/09/iana-transition-update/ Jari

2 4

Re: [Internal-cg] RFP released?
by Alissa Cooper Sept. 11, 2014

Sept. 11, 2014

I noticed a few issues with the RFP, draft announcement, and timeline, so Mohamed and I are sorting through these with Alice: 1. The latest version of the RFP still had 31 December as the target date; it has been fixed in the attached and in Dropbox. 2. We’ve specified in the announcement that icg-forum(a)icann.org is the address to use for RFP clarification questions. 3. We didn’t have any language in the announcement about how we want the communities to submit proposals to us. I added a sentence to indicate that the proposals should be conveyed to the ICG mailing list by an ICG representative. 4. The timeline needs to go out as well and should be announced as part of the same announcement. also found an error in the v6 version Russ circulated, in the way the web forum was described. I’ve attached an updated version for publication, v7, and put it in Dropbox. 5. The timeline did not have a deadline for comments. I was not sure if this was intentional or not. I’ve inserted October 6 as a deadline. Given how late it is today, I think we should plan to publish the announcement, RFP, and timeline tomorrow (9 September). Updated draft announcement text is below and on Dropbox: — IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group Issues Request for Transition Proposals and Suggested Transition Process Timeline The IANA Coordination Group (ICG) is pleased to announce the release of a Request for Proposals (RFP), for communities interested in and/or affected by the transition of IANA Stewardship from the United States NTIA to the Global Multistakeholder Internet community. The RFP is available on the ICG website at: < <https://www.icann.org/stewardship> please insert a direct link to the RFP> Should any community submitting a proposal require clarifications to the RFP, these should be submitted to the ICG on or before Wednesday, 24 September 2014. Submissions should be sent by email to icg-forum(a)icann.org before this date, and responses will be provided by the ICG by 20 October 2014. Clarification questions will be publicly archived at http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum. We expect communities to be able to begin work immediately on their proposals, in light of the aggressive timetable for this work. The communities should submit their proposals to the ICG before or on 15 January 2015. Proposals should be conveyed to the ICG by ICG members. The ICG has also released a suggested timeline for the transition process: <please insert a direct link to the timeline> While this timeline is aggressive, every attempt has been made to be flexible and allow all communities to participate effectively. The ICG is therefore providing this timeline for review and comment. Please provide comments by email to icg-forum(a)icann.org by 6 October 2014. They will be publicly archived at http://forum.icann.org/lists/icg-forum. — On 9/8/14, 4:00 PM, "Milton L Mueller" <mueller(a)syr.edu> wrote: > I did not see that the RFP was released today, did I miss something? > > Milton L Mueller > Laura J and L. Douglas Meredith Professor > Syracuse University School of Information Studies > http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/ > > > _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

6 8