- Internal-cg - lists.icann.org

Link to Dropbox
by Patrik Fältström July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

For anyone that do not have direct read/write access to dropbox with our documents (and yes, I mean anyone), they can use the following link to access dropbox read-only: <https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7x5poce3wb8ffsv/AAAdrm8pTAck7wvExIuNpYdTa> Please pass it on. Patrik

1 0

Chair structure poll
by Alissa Cooper July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

I have taken Joe’s suggestion and created a poll concerning chair structure [1]: http://tinyurl.com/pgufgjh I suggest we set a deadline of July 30 at 20:00 UTC for people to respond to the poll. After that, we can create another poll for actually selecting people, or take an email vote, or work it out by some other mechanism that we can figure out next week. The responses to the chair structure poll will be publicly visible here [2]: http://tinyurl.com/ptrr2m6 I appreciate that we are still figuring out the details of our processes and consensus mechanisms. We did have support for the three co-chair structure in London, and now we appear to have some support for other models, so I think in this bootstrapping phase we should be at least a bit flexible and take a little more time to determine a structure that has broad support. I also recognize that we’ve had a variety of deadlines suggested for different aspects of this chair selection issue, but my sense from the list discussion is that resolving this structure question mid-next-week and the actual personnel selection shortly thereafter will work while I continue as interim chair. Please fill out the chair structure poll by July 30 at 20:00 UTC and we’ll take it from there. Thanks, Alissa [1] Full URL is here (I used tinyurl to avoid line-break problems): https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1gngAa7fjboC9y2zdKs7rmH9H08RLyW7Qv4hE1Dj0D2 Y/viewform [2] Full URL: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xJkGxBRu6BBPX9XSTCRQNblNG7QEE-RllGR 9ZCvvY8g/edit#gid=1350424468 On 7/25/14, 9:53 AM, "Jon Nevett" <jon(a)donuts.co> wrote: >I'm sure that the ICANN staff folks could do it if we agree on the >questions to ask and that the exercise is worthwhile. Best, jon > > > >On Jul 25, 2014, at 9:41 AM, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff(a)oracle.com> >wrote: > >> While I have used doodle I have not set one up, so i would invite >>anyone so inclined to go forth and doodle. I would however remind >>everyone that we have a 2 stage question: >> >> 1. Composition of Chairs - Three co-chairs or Chair/Alternate+ >>volunteers >> 2. Who will serve. >> >> Thanks >> >> Joe >> On 7/25/2014 8:45 AM, Jon Nevett wrote: >>> Joe: >>> >>> In various ICANN fora, we have used Doodle polls to determine >>>substantive issues in addition to scheduling meetings. It's a >>>relatively quick way to get a sense of the group and it might be >>>appropriate in this situation. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Jon >>> >>> >>> On Jul 25, 2014, at 8:34 AM, joseph alhadeff >>><joseph.alhadeff(a)oracle.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Colleagues: >>>> >>>> Alissa is already interim chair, as of London. I assume she has been >>>>somewhat silent on the topic because of what might be considered a >>>>conflict of interest. >>>> >>>> One point was clear in London however, the Chair does not determine >>>>unilaterally what is consensus except for the administrative matters >>>>related to running meetings. Where no consensus emerges, the Chair >>>>leads a process of coming to consensus. That is different than >>>>determining consensus. Thus, I would have to take exception to >>>>Patrik's solution of the appointment of one chair resolves the process >>>>issue. Furthermore, in this case it might be difficult for the >>>>Interim Chair to run the process of consensus related to her possibly >>>>becoming chair... >>>> >>>> I would however suggest, that each of us bears a participatory >>>>responsibility. If we don't agree with a proposal we must step >>>>forward with opposing or differing views. Those views need to be made >>>>known at the earliest opportunity. If this constructive participation >>>>does not emerge then our mission is doomed from the outset. My >>>>suggestion would be that each decision point provide a fixed time, not >>>>less than a week, for consultation. With the exception of consensus >>>>on the proposals, which should be more carefully judged, each proposal >>>>would then achieve consensus by having a preponderance of the >>>>communities entitled to vote (each of the separate groups identified >>>>in Patrik's list, excluding liaisons) support it. Comments may also >>>>suggest the need for more time to consult on the decision or raise the >>>>importance of the issue to justify a more deliberative process. I am >>>>fine with the interim chair or secretariat acting as the collection >>>>point of views, but they should also be copied to the list for >>>>transparency. For the Chair function, it might be best to keep posting >>>>to the list. >>>> >>>> I know folks wanted to avoid levels of bureaucracy, but I prefer >>>>established process to endless cycles of review with no potential to >>>>conclude... Equally happy to entertain other proposals. >>>> >>>> Jean-Jacques - you indicated you were consulting with colleagues, can >>>>you say when the group will provide an opinion? Open-ended timelines >>>>will not help us develop efficient process or workflows. >>>> >>>> Best- >>>> >>>> Joe >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/25/2014 7:17 AM, WUKnoben wrote: >>>>> Dear Colleagues, >>>>> >>>>> I acknowledge the different views on >>>>> 1. discussing and solving more principle questions about role and >>>>>number of (co-) chairs and >>>>> 2. continuing the work of the ICG where the chair shall be given a >>>>>focal role on taking initiatives and organization >>>>> >>>>> Both seems equally necessary. In this regard I suggest to appoint >>>>>Alissa as Interim Chair with chairperson authorization as described >>>>>by Patrik until we've finished the principle questions and a >>>>>following (co-) chair selection. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards >>>>> >>>>> Wolf-Ulrich >>>>> >>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Subrenat, Jean-Jacques >>>>> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 9:32 AM >>>>> To: ICG Internal >>>>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Appointment of Alissa Cooper as chair of >>>>>ICG >>>>> >>>>> Dear Colleagues, >>>>> >>>>> this is to inform you that the ALAC will be sending its observations >>>>>shortly, not only on the structure of the Coordination Group, but >>>>>also on other matters of importance. >>>>> >>>>> In the meantime, the ALAC respectfully requests that decisions >>>>>concerning the roles of individual members not be taken before some >>>>>questions of principle have been adequately addressed. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Jean-Jacques. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Mail original ----- >>>>> De: "Narelle Clark" <narelle.clark(a)accan.org.au> >>>>> À: "Paul Wilson" <pwilson(a)apnic.net>, "Patrik Fältström" >>>>><paf(a)frobbit.se> >>>>> Cc: "ICG Internal" <internal-cg(a)icann.org> >>>>> Envoyé: Vendredi 25 Juillet 2014 08:45:51 >>>>> Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Appointment of Alissa Cooper as chair of ICG >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Patrik, on those conditions, I also support Alissa's >>>>>appointment. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Best regards >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Narelle Clark >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: internal-cg-bounces(a)icann.org >>>>>[mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul Wilson >>>>> Sent: Friday, 25 July 2014 4:42 PM >>>>> To: Patrik Fältström >>>>> Cc: ICG Internal >>>>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Appointment of Alissa Cooper as chair of >>>>>ICG >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Patrik, I support. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 25 Jul 2014, at 4:40 pm, Patrik Fältström <paf(a)frobbit.se> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I hereby take the initiative to ask for consensus for appointment >>>>>>of Alissa Cooper as the chair of ICG. This does not imply anything >>>>>>regarding whether we should have one or more chairs, one chair and >>>>>>zero of more alternate chairs, status of the document by Joseph etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> It just, if it passes, gives the power to Alissa to be able to >>>>>>define when we have consensus in ICG. >>>>>> >>>>>> If someone OBJECTS to Alissa being appointed as a chair, that >>>>>>objection should be sent to this list no later than 1800 UTC on >>>>>>Monday July 28. >>>>>> >>>>>> If there are zero objections on Monday July 28 at 1800 UTC I find >>>>>>Alissa Cooper be appointed as the chair of ICG. >>>>>> >>>>>> Main reason for me to ask for this (which anyone can object to as >>>>>>you see above) is that I feel we need someone being "the chair" to >>>>>>even be able to reach consensus on the document that define what the >>>>>>role of the chair is. >>>>>> >>>>>> So this call is to bootstrap our processes. Nothing more, nothing >>>>>>less. >>>>>> >>>>>> Patrik Fältström >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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

Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
by joseph alhadeff July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

Colleagues: As a result of the consultation process, a new consensus has emerged: There is now support for a Chair and Alternate. I have taken the liberty off accommodating a minority request for co-chairs by allowing the Chair to have the Alternate play a supporting role to share the work as they see fit between themselves, but the Chair is the primary decision-maker between the two. I have adapted the previous document to reflect that. Attached is a red line version, below is a clean text. In the process of comment Alissa Cooper has been the only candidate for Chair spontaneously suggested. There is a request of the existing volunteers or any new volunteers to clarify their position related to what role they are interested in; please note the timeline below. One question as to process. Online, the only humming comes from the air conditioning; therefore the process of achieving consensus is the rough consensus among those who post an opinion. To date the above reflects the consensus comments. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ *_Role Of The Chair-Alternate (Draft v 1.0)_* *Introduction* As a result of the consultation since the first meeting of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) a new consensus has emerged among those that have commented.There will be one Chair and an Alternate.. A call for volunteers remains open among committee members for Chair and Alternate. It continues to be agreed that the roles of the Chair/Alternate, supported by the secretariat, would be mostly related to the organization and running of the coordination group – keeping the trains running on time was a description often used by analogy.The ability of Chair/Alternate to execute the needed functions and work collaboratively was seen as essential to the role.It was also suggested by some that considerations of diversity would be desirable in the choice of officers. Finally it was suggested that a more precise resume of the roles would be useful, which is the purpose of this draft. *Comment and Selection Process* This Draft, Chair-Alternate (draft 1.0) has incorporated the requested changes from commentators, with one compromise – there was a minority request for more than one chair to share the work.I have proposed that the Chair and Alternate can self-organize the work between themselves.This maintains one clear Chair, while allowing for the Alternate to support the chair as well. The final deadline for comments and additional volunteers by 2:00PM CET Thursday July 24th to the list under the subject “Role of the Chair-Alternate draft v 1.0 for comment and volunteers”.The Role of the Chair-Alternate document and list of volunteers will be posted on Thursday evening.ICG members must make their preferences for Chair and Alternate known one week from that date (COB July 31).If ICG members are in agreement (please suggest alternative procedures to the list, if not), preferences can be manifested by sending a post to the list with your preferred candidate for each role.. We would ask that all volunteers be sure to have submitted their bios to the secretariat as requested so that they are available for review.Any volunteer wishing to provide further information may do so by e-mail to the list.To date, there have been 5 volunteers: Russ Housley (IAB) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Partrik Faltstrom (SSAC) Keith Drazek (GTLd Registries) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC) Since the consultation, a majority of the commentators, including some of the other volunteers, have supported Alissa Cooper to be Chair (the only person mentioned to date for the revised role), citing her exemplary work in preparing for and executing the de-facto chair role of the first meeting.Alissa has indicated her willingness to serve if that is the will of the group.Furthermore, there have been no suggestions for modification to the role description. In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions?Obviously, Alissa has been nominated for Chair and accepted, if so confirmed, so that is clarified as to her intent. *Chair/Alternate Processes and Responsibilities:* Operational Processes ·There will be a Chair and an Alternate (selected from volunteers) that will serve for the duration of this exercise.The Alternate will be able to act as chair if the Chair is unavailable and will also be able to support the Chair in related activities as needed. ·The ICG will reserve the right to change the number of the Chair/Alternate, their role or who will serve, as appropriate, through its established operating procedure of rough consensus. ·If for any reason the Chair or Alternate is no longer able or willing to serve in that capacity, they will inform the secretariat who will communicate this to the ICG and request that it seek volunteers to fill the vacancy.. ·The Chair and Alternate are explicitly able to participate in ICG discussions on their own or their constituency’s behalf and are just requested to take appropriate precaution that there is no confusion related to their role in such participation. ·The operational modalities of the Chair and Alternate, who is undertaking what function, moderating the conversation for example, maintaining the que…, is left to the Chair’s self-organization.It was the view of the ICG that we did not wish to micro-manage the Chair operations, but ICG obviously reserves the right to suggest or make changes pursuant to rough consensus. Responsibilities: ·The role of the Chair/Alternate is to assure that meetings and conference calls are properly scheduled, planned, prepared, organized and efficiently conducted including: ofinalizing this version of the timeline and other work in process oplanning for appropriate outreach and consultation otimely developing agendas in appropriate consultation with ICG, oorganizing volunteers (for themes, discussion topics and other needed functions) omoderating discussion and other elements of meeting function ooverseeing minutes and summaries being taken, reviewed and circulated in a timely fashion supported by the secretariat as well as the drafting, circulation and publication of other needed papers and documents, and oassuring that action items are captured, completed or otherwise followed up; including between calls and meetings. ·Chair/Alternate will be appropriately supported by the Secretariat in the executing these functions. ·Chair/Alternate are not meant to have independent decision-making in substantive issues of the ICG on behalf of the group, but are rather the coordinators of the process elements related to the calls, meetings and related functions.Decisions must remain inclusive and collaborative. There was discussion, however, that where rough consensus does not emerge organically or cannot be recognized, the Chair/Alternate will lead the ICG in a process to finalize rough consensus. ·There is no current spokesperson or press liaison role associated to the Chair/Alternate, but the ICG may revisit that function as needed and subject to whatever conditions (only speak from agreed points, etc) it feels appropriate. ·Chair/Alternate should also recognize that by virtue of their title they are clothed with apparent authority and should make clear across all situations what their role and representative capacity is (on behalf of themselves, their consistency…) ·Chair/Alternate need to be mindful of and support the needs of transparency of this process in the planning, organization, conduct and reporting back of calls and meetings as well as the drafting of papers and other supporting documents

12 20

Appointment of Alissa Cooper as chair of ICG
by Patrik Fältström July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

I hereby take the initiative to ask for consensus for appointment of Alissa Cooper as the chair of ICG. This does not imply anything regarding whether we should have one or more chairs, one chair and zero of more alternate chairs, status of the document by Joseph etc. It just, if it passes, gives the power to Alissa to be able to define when we have consensus in ICG. If someone OBJECTS to Alissa being appointed as a chair, that objection should be sent to this list no later than 1800 UTC on Monday July 28. If there are zero objections on Monday July 28 at 1800 UTC I find Alissa Cooper be appointed as the chair of ICG. Main reason for me to ask for this (which anyone can object to as you see above) is that I feel we need someone being "the chair" to even be able to reach consensus on the document that define what the role of the chair is. So this call is to bootstrap our processes. Nothing more, nothing less. Patrik Fältström

11 13

Appointment of Chair
by Mary Uduma July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

All, I support Alissa as Chair. Direct mails from members have not been dropping in my box. I must have checked a wrong box when updating my info on the mailing list. I do get the daily bounce and read your mails indirectly from the manger. I will correct it. Mary Uduma

1 0

London meeting - Expenses
by Alice Jansen July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

Dear ICG members, ICG members who requested travel support to attend the London meeting (17-18 July 2014) should have received information on how to request incidentals reimbursement. Forms were also included. We invite you to submit your expenses, if any, as soon as possible. Please contact me (off-list) should you have any questions or concerns. Thank you, Best regards Alice

1 0

Proposal: UTC and only UTC, please
by Paul Wilson July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

Can I propose strongly that we please use UTC, and only UTC, consistently for all timing purposes in the IGC. If UTC is used, then all members can be clear on what this means for them, and there is no need for timezone translations to be provided. (In my experiences, translations do not help, but only risk introducing errors and confusion.) The one exception is for physical meetings where local time should be used of course, along with UTC equivalent for info of remote participants. Thanks. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg(a)apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 See you at APNIC 38! http://conference.apnic.net/38

7 6

Re: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
by Joseph Alhadeff July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

The need for diversity was listed as a desirable characteristic in the description, the way people choose will determine the importance they place on that fact. Jean-Jacques raised the question about the number of co-chairs and whether we have consensus for that change. We need to come to closure on that before we can proceed. With only a minority of members having expressed any opinion I have asked for the definition of a process related to how to determine when online consensus is achieved, but that conversation has not been engaged. The next steps belong to the list. Joe Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com) -----Original Message----- From: Paul Wilson [pwilson(a)apnic.net] Received: Thursday, 24 Jul 2014, 10:36PM To: joseph alhadeff [joseph.alhadeff(a)oracle.com] CC: Subrenat, Jean-Jacques [jjs(a)dyalog.net] internal-cg(a)icann.org [internal-cg(a)icann.org] Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 Hi all, I share the concern of Jean-Jacques about the constitution of the group of chairs, and the need for diversity (which I spoke to during the meeting). Sorry if I also missed the opportunity to respond while the discussion was underway (due to travel) but I think this is important and we should take the time necessary to gain a fuller consensus on these questions. Paul. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg(a)apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 See you at APNIC 38! http://conference.apnic.net/38 On 25 Jul 2014, at 12:15 am, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff(a)oracle.com> wrote: > Jean-Jacques, Colleagues: > > We will need to come to operating agreements related to online process. Specific dates were set for comment. Proposals were made for the change and seconded by the only people who bothered to comment. Requests of reaction to the proposal were made which generated no reply beyond similar reaffirmation. What is our online consensus process if not taking into account comments made? If those who do not agree don't comment I'm not sure how that is to be intuited or factored. There is no humming or "thumbs up" online and I cautioned that silence would be interpreted s assent and still no comments. This needs to be an active and participative group. How would you propose achieving consensus on new proposals/amendments? > > Joe > On 7/24/2014 9:54 AM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote: >> Hello Joe, >> >> the reason I have not "reconfirmed" is that, as a representative of the ALAC, I cannot agree to the fact that the decision taken in London (3 Co-Chairs) has been modified in several iterations (one Chair, one Chair + Alternate(s), Chair and sub-Chairs...) without full consensus. There is no point in replying to a subsidiary question, such as my candidacy, before questions of principle have been properly dealt with (as things stand today, heavy representation of one citizenship and of business -in various guises- in the Coordination Group, content of our current draft Charter, the "technical" nature of the exercise to be dealt with only or chiefly by the "technical" and business entities, image that an unbalanced Group would give to the global Internet community, the risk that this may contribute to a misrepresentation of the true motivation of the USG, etc). >> >> Because of their non-anecdotal nature, I have referred these points to the ALAC, and am awaiting instructions. >> >> Best regards, >> Jean-Jacques. >> >> >> >> ----- Mail original ----- >> De: "joseph alhadeff" <joseph.alhadeff(a)oracle.com> >> À: internal-cg(a)icann.org >> Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Juillet 2014 13:51:22 >> Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Fwd: Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 >> >> >> Colleagues - as we March to Noon UTC, I wanted to provide and update on volunteers and one more look at the proposed final paper (attached for your reference). >> >> To date the following information exists on our volunteers and their positions of interest: >> >> >> >> Alissa Cooper – Chair >> >> Keith Drazek – Alternate >> >> Patrik Faltstrom – Alternate >> >> Russ Housley – reconfirmed interest, but position not specified >> >> Jean-Jacques Subrenat – has not reconfirmed. >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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

Handling Comments submitted to CG - Re: Fwd: Comments on Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
by Mohamed El Bashir July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

Dear All, As our CG Charter is currently up for comments, then there should be a proper comments process with designated channel/s for people to contribute. Richard Hill submitted comments on the charter and because his is not a member of the internal-CG mailing list, his contribution forwarded by ICANN staff and therefore accepted as valid contribution and further discussions evolved . i am concerned that we don't a clear process for receiving/handling comments neither from the wider stakeholders community or our 13 represented communities within CG. The Comment period deadlines need to be clear, e.g the draft charter document nor CG web page dose provide any information about how and when to submit comments. suggesting the following : - internal-CG mailing list to used for internal CG members discussion only, lets avoid copying internal CG mailing list in the communities internal IANA transition mailing lists discussion. we are presenting our communities in CG and cross mailing lists emails will create confusion. - secretariat to create a specific email/mailing list for comments submission to CG ( e.g cg-comments@xxxx ), the submitted contributions can be available online as well. - Comments from represented communities should be sent only via their representatives in CG. - the submitted comments can be reviewed at the end of the comment period or as its been received ( our internal decision), its always better to produce the updated draft document incorporating the accepted comments after reviewing all the submitted comments, the final document to be reviewed and approved by CG . BTW, our last meeting documents (e.g charter, statement,.. ) is published in ICANN web site under "announcements", it need to be added to our CG web pages under "IANA Stewardship" for easy access for everyone. Regards, Mohamed On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Ergys Ramaj <ergys.ramaj(a)icann.org> wrote: > Dear all, > > Richard Hill has submitted comments on the draft charter (attached). > > Given that he does not have posting rights to this mailing list, we are > forwarding his original note to ensure delivery. > > Best, > Ergys > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Richard Hill <rhill(a)hill-a.ch> > *Date:* July 23, 2014 at 12:30:01 PM GMT+2 > *To:* "Ianaxfer@Elists. Isoc. Org" <ianaxfer(a)elists.isoc.org>, > "Ianatransition@Icann. Org" <ianatransition(a)icann.org>, ICANN Internal < > internal-cg(a)icann.org> > *Cc:* "Rhill@Alum. Mit. Edu" <rhill(a)alum.mit.edu> > *Subject:* *[Internal-cg] Comments on Draft charter for the IANA > Stewardship Transition Coordination Group* > *Reply-To:* <rhill(a)hill-a.ch> > > Please find attached my comments on the Draft charter for the IANA > Stewardship Transition Coordination Group and some proposed revisions. > > Best, > Richard Hill > > > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg > >

4 3

Chair-Alternate Volunteers
by joseph alhadeff July 24, 2014

July 24, 2014

Colleagues: Can I please remind any volunteers to reaffirm that they remain interested in a role and to specifiy which role(s) they are interested in. Thanks Joe

3 3