Jari:

Thanks, this version is improved, but I think still fails to properly treat the non-operational communities.  I have provided language related to categorizing communities as those which have operational relationships with IANA and those that may be impacted by those relationships.  This is an important distinction as it will play a role in who requirements for proposals are directed at.  That being said there also remains a need to specifically call out the role and consultation process with those impacted groups in the creation of the proposal.

Proposed language already was submitted in my version Daft 4 on these topics. 

Joe
On 7/18/2014 3:06 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
Version 4 after a breakfast meeting with Milton, Mary, and Alissa.

We have I believe gone through all comments (in some cases making our own version of the suggested change, however).  Change marks are turned on in the document, so you see what has been done. The scope language edited yesterday by the group has also been included (with small edits from Milton). 

We can discuss this further in the group meeting today.

Thanks, all.

Jari





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