I have no problem that ICANN transmit the proposal to NTIA but without any modification what so ever.
i.e. ICANN ACTS AS A post office.
We do not want the all efforts made by global multistakeholder community be edited or modified or commented by ICANN
ICANN  could be part of the process and submites its comment to ICG and not act as AUDITOR FOR ICG
Regards
Kavouss  

2014-10-09 23:18 GMT+02:00 Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>:
Begin forwarded message:

From: Fiona Alexander <FAlexander@ntia.doc.gov>
Subject: Procedural Issue
Date: October 7, 2014 at 12:18:30 PM PDT
Cc: Ashley Heineman <AHeineman@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-key-internet-domain-name-functions).  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)
 
 



_______________________________________________
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg