Alissa, just to understand: what is the relatively short - and absolute -deadline good for? Today at the CWG meeting we have heard from their revised timeline which will affect the assembly and finalization process. In this context I wonder whether we shouldn't ask for responses by 04 Feb but leave also an opportunity for further comments. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Sent from my personal phone
Am 29.01.2015 um 19:38 schrieb Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>:
I took an action item on the call to draft a public announcement about timely receipt of community comments. Here it is:
---
The ICG’s Request for Proposals <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14-en....> from the operational communities noted the following:
"While the ICG is requesting complete formal proposals through processes convened by each of the operational communities, and that all interested parties get involved as early as possible in the relevant community processes, some parties may choose to provide comments directly to the ICG about specific aspects of particular proposals, about the community processes, or about the ICG’s own processes. Comments may be directly submitted to the ICG any time via email to icg-forum@icann.org.”
The ICG will next be discussing the protocol parameters and numbers proposals on February 6. As such, the ICG requests that community comments concerning those two proposals or the processes used to create them be received by February 4 at 23:59 UTC. Comments received after that time will not be considered as part of Step I of the ICG’s Proposal Assembly and Finalization Process <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-transition-assembly-finaliz...> for the protocol parameters and numbering proposals.
—
I’d like to get this posted by January 30 at 20:00 UTC, so please send your feedback as soon as possible.
Alissa _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg