Seun,
No, NTIA asked ICANN to convene a process and the coordination group, which has just been formed, is responsible for delibering the final proposal to NTIA.
From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 10:00 AM
To: Richard Hill
Cc: Milton L Mueller; Ianatransition@Icann. Org; ICANN Internal
Subject: Re: [ianatransition] Comments on Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
Hello Richard,
Perhaps the initial question we need to ask is who delivers the final proposal to NTIA. So i am basically asking, has NTIA tasked ICANN or ICG? From my understanding, NTIA has tasked ICANN and in return ICANN is engaging the internet community
through the ICG. So ICANN will finally deliver to NTIA, the "read-only" proposal submitted to her by ICG.
If you agree with that understanding then, i hope you will agree that your suggested edit does not fall in line
Cheers!
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Richard Hill <rhill@hill-a.ch> wrote:
Dear Milton,
Unless I am missing something, this group is responding to a request from NTIA. NTIA refers to the "global multi-stakeholder community", so I don't see how the coordination group's charter can use a different term. And what is the "global Internet community"? Is there a definition of that? Who is included?
You state: "The IANA functions are being transferred to some set of actors in the Internet community". Doesn't that prejudge the outcome (in particular by ruling out the creation of a new body)? Or is that one of the preconditions set by NTIA?
And a meta-question: how will disagreements regarding the group's charter be resolved? By the group itself? Or by the "global multi-stakeholder community", which is presumably what NTIA had in mind?
Best,
Richard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu]
> Sent: mercredi, 23. juillet 2014 15:12
> To: rhill@hill-a.ch; Ianatransition@Icann. Org; ICANN Internal
> Subject: RE: [ianatransition] Comments on Draft charter for the IANA
> Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
>
>
> I would oppose most of the proposed changes in the preamble,
> where we define the deliverable of the group.
> The changes in the first sentence are mere word-smithing and a
> matter of style and I prefer to directness of the original version.
> All but one of the other proposed changes in the first paragraph
> seem ill-advised to me. The IANA functions are being transferred
> to some set of actors in the Internet community; our job is to
> ensure that the proposal makes those actors accountable to the
> global MS community (whatever that is) but not to transfer them
> to the global MS comm as such. Thus, I prefer "Internet
> community" to "global MS community." Further, "global MS
> community" is a mouthful and a bit of jargon to an ordinary
> person; let's just say what we mean.
>
> I do agree that the final proposal we submit should include
> dissenting views. But given that our job is to assist in and
> compile an executable proposal it makes no sense to include any
> and all proposals that were either not workable nor not supported.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ianatransition-bounces@icann.org
[mailto:ianatransition-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hill
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:30 AM
To: Ianaxfer@Elists. Isoc. Org; Ianatransition@Icann. Org; ICANN Internal
Cc: Rhill@Alum. Mit. Edu
Subject: [ianatransition] Comments on Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
Please find attached my comments on the Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group and some proposed revisions.
Best,
Richard Hill
_______________________________________________
ianatransition mailing list
ianatransition@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seun Ojedeji,
Federal University Oye-Ekiti
web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
Mobile: +2348035233535
alt email: seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ngThe key to understanding is humility - my view !