Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
While I generally agree that we do not need to provide definitions as a matter of course we do have to avoid confusion in our use of terms. Is there a belief that people would be unclear as to what we mean by IANA functions? There have been issues of functions that are specified in the contract or not. While our RFP does reference similar terms I am not sure that they are defined. That might be the role of an FAQ... ----- Original Message ----- From: paf@frobbit.se To: kuoweiwu@gmail.com Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 12:46:52 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. On 1 okt 2014, at 06:23, Patrik Fältström wrote: > Personally, I do not think we need to add definitions. It adds to the confusion. My apologies for not being more clear... Reason for this is that we already have an agreed to text in the RFP we have submitted. As Milton said on the call, we should have simple answers to simple repeated questions. Regarding "what is IANA", maybe we should just remove the question? Patrik _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Whatever we do, let’s make sure that our definition of IANA does not say that it is a “set of functions performed by the IANA.” ;-) From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Joe Alhadeff Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 3:46 AM To: paf@frobbit.se Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. While I generally agree that we do not need to provide definitions as a matter of course we do have to avoid confusion in our use of terms. Is there a belief that people would be unclear as to what we mean by IANA functions? There have been issues of functions that are specified in the contract or not. While our RFP does reference similar terms I am not sure that they are defined. That might be the role of an FAQ... ----- Original Message ----- From: paf@frobbit.se<mailto:paf@frobbit.se> To: kuoweiwu@gmail.com<mailto:kuoweiwu@gmail.com> Cc: internal-cg@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg@icann.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 12:46:52 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ .. On 1 okt 2014, at 06:23, Patrik Fältström wrote: > Personally, I do not think we need to add definitions. It adds to the confusion. My apologies for not being more clear... Reason for this is that we already have an agreed to text in the RFP we have submitted. As Milton said on the call, we should have simple answers to simple repeated questions. Regarding "what is IANA", maybe we should just remove the question? Patrik _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org<mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
He he he... One of my favorites, see attached picture. Patrik On 1 okt 2014, at 18:02, Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> wrote:
Whatever we do, let’s make sure that our definition of IANA does not say that it is a “set of functions performed by the IANA.” ;-)
From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Joe Alhadeff Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 3:46 AM To: paf@frobbit.se Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
While I generally agree that we do not need to provide definitions as a matter of course we do have to avoid confusion in our use of terms. Is there a belief that people would be unclear as to what we mean by IANA functions? There have been issues of functions that are specified in the contract or not. While our RFP does reference similar terms I am not sure that they are defined. That might be the role of an FAQ... ----- Original Message ----- From: paf@frobbit.se To: kuoweiwu@gmail.com Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 12:46:52 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
On 1 okt 2014, at 06:23, Patrik Fältström wrote: > Personally, I do not think we need to add definitions. It adds to the confusion. My apologies for not being more clear... Reason for this is that we already have an agreed to text in the RFP we have submitted. As Milton said on the call, we should have simple answers to simple repeated questions. Regarding "what is IANA", maybe we should just remove the question? Patrik _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Dear Patrik Thank you for your comment But I have no answer for some or perhaps any of them an dI thought someone in ICG maight have answer to those questions them we could paris them and once blessed by others we then put it on the list Kavoussl 2014-10-01 21:51 GMT+02:00 Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>:
He he he...
One of my favorites, see attached picture.
Patrik
On 1 okt 2014, at 18:02, Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> wrote:
Whatever we do, let’s make sure that our definition of IANA does not say that it is a “set of functions performed by the IANA.” ;-)
*From:* internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org <internal-cg-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Joe Alhadeff *Sent:* Wednesday, October 1, 2014 3:46 AM *To:* paf@frobbit.se *Cc:* internal-cg@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
While I generally agree that we do not need to provide definitions as a matter of course we do have to avoid confusion in our use of terms. Is there a belief that people would be unclear as to what we mean by IANA functions? There have been issues of functions that are specified in the contract or not. While our RFP does reference similar terms I am not sure that they are defined. That might be the role of an FAQ... ----- Original Message ----- From: paf@frobbit.se To: kuoweiwu@gmail.com Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 12:46:52 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
On 1 okt 2014, at 06:23, Patrik Fältström wrote: > Personally, I do not think we need to add definitions. It adds to the confusion. My apologies for not being more clear... Reason for this is that we already have an agreed to text in the RFP we have submitted. As Milton said on the call, we should have simple answers to simple repeated questions. Regarding "what is IANA", maybe we should just remove the question? Patrik _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Proposed edits, comments and clarifications from me attached and on the dropbox. Ultimately they ended up being both simple semantic and substantive in nature. I recommend that for ease of viewing one uses the 'Track changes' --> 'view final' option as this is far less cluttered. After reading, switch back to see the comments and rationale behind some of the changes. I also realised that there is one question I keep getting from people: "Has the NTIA ever invoked its stewardship powers?" and while I have an answer, I'm not convinced it is completely correct. I've included that one for general dissection. Best regards Narelle -- Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website --------------------------------------------- The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
-----Original Message----- I also realised that there is one question I keep getting from people: "Has the NTIA ever invoked its stewardship powers?" and while I have an answer, I'm not convinced it is completely correct. I've included that one for general dissection.
I would advise against touching this. First, it has nothing to do with the ICG activities or mission. Second, a correct answer to that question (which would be 'yes' in relation to the .xxx application), is not something that a lot of people want to hear and we will end up debating it endlessly, for no reason. The FAQ should answer questions about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. The FAQ is not (or perhaps I should say, I believe it should not be) a general tutorial on IANA, the IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
Really like the way you handled Question 3. Questions 7 and 8 are in effect predicting out the outcome of the process and are therefore inappropriate and should be deleted. I also believe we should not include Question 9, as noted in my prior message. You've deleted what used to be Question 9 1/2. "Can I submit a proposal..." probably because you think it is answered by your new question 12 (How can I participate?) I object to this - I get asked the more specific question all the time and it relates directly to how ordinary people relate to the ICG and its process. I only have time now to go through the first half of the document, so I want to get these comments out now. Will have more comments about the second half later.
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg- bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2014 6:16 AM To: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
Proposed edits, comments and clarifications from me attached and on the dropbox. Ultimately they ended up being both simple semantic and substantive in nature.
I recommend that for ease of viewing one uses the 'Track changes' --> 'view final' option as this is far less cluttered. After reading, switch back to see the comments and rationale behind some of the changes.
I also realised that there is one question I keep getting from people: "Has the NTIA ever invoked its stewardship powers?" and while I have an answer, I'm not convinced it is completely correct. I've included that one for general dissection.
Best regards
Narelle
--
Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia
Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website
---------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e- mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
Dear All, I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power? In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the IANA transition, and ICANN accountability Sorry Milton, I hope you will not be bothered by my comments Kavouss 2014-10-02 16:47 GMT+02:00 Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>:
Really like the way you handled Question 3.
Questions 7 and 8 are in effect predicting out the outcome of the process and are therefore inappropriate and should be deleted. I also believe we should not include Question 9, as noted in my prior message.
You've deleted what used to be Question 9 1/2. "Can I submit a proposal..." probably because you think it is answered by your new question 12 (How can I participate?) I object to this - I get asked the more specific question all the time and it relates directly to how ordinary people relate to the ICG and its process.
I only have time now to go through the first half of the document, so I want to get these comments out now. Will have more comments about the second half later.
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg- bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2014 6:16 AM To: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
Proposed edits, comments and clarifications from me attached and on the dropbox. Ultimately they ended up being both simple semantic and substantive in nature.
I recommend that for ease of viewing one uses the 'Track changes' --> 'view final' option as this is far less cluttered. After reading, switch back to see the comments and rationale behind some of the changes.
I also realised that there is one question I keep getting from people: "Has the NTIA ever invoked its stewardship powers?" and while I have an answer, I'm not convinced it is completely correct. I've included that one for general dissection.
Best regards
Narelle
--
Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia
Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website
---------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e- mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
-----Original Message----- From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 5:01 AM
I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power?
Like I said, I am not wed to the inclusion of the question re invocation of power. As they say, I was merely flying a kite as it is a question I have been frequently receiving. To the latter question, that surely is up to the communities to propose and decide. And a good question, indeed.
In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
I agree they are questions people need and want answers to. Whether we should be the ones to provide them is subject to how much time we have as it can be a long diversion... The risk is that it dilutes our credibility as impartial coordinators of the community finding its own answers. Best regards Narelle -- Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website --------------------------------------------- The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
Thanks for the responses .. I believe we have agreed to have a version out before LA, right? If yes, then maybe we should set a cutoff date for comments, after which we should compile an agreed version to be posted online, and continue discussing any remaining 'relevant' questions .. Views received so far, which I personally share and Narelle showed flexibility, are in favour of deleting Q9 .. As for Q7, I personally agree to deleting it, but allow me to propose a middle ground .. It may be changed to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?", although the answer may be the same, it would be stating facts rather than predicting outcome of the process .. thoughts? Q8 is one of the questions that were listed for the session held at the IGF, but I agree to its deletion .. Waiting for further comments before compiling a new version .. Kind Regards --Manal -----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 2:56 AM To: Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
-----Original Message----- From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 5:01 AM
I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power?
Like I said, I am not wed to the inclusion of the question re invocation of power. As they say, I was merely flying a kite as it is a question I have been frequently receiving. To the latter question, that surely is up to the communities to propose and decide. And a good question, indeed.
In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
I agree they are questions people need and want answers to. Whether we should be the ones to provide them is subject to how much time we have as it can be a long diversion... The risk is that it dilutes our credibility as impartial coordinators of the community finding its own answers. Best regards Narelle -- Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website --------------------------------------------- The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference. _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
All, So that we can get a draft, living version of the FAQ posted to the web site prior to ICANN 51, we need to give Manal a little time to compile outstanding comments and create a clean version. Comments sent to the list about the FAQ prior to 23:59 UTC on October 7 will be incorporated into the initial version we publish on the web. Of course we will continue discussion and refinement of the FAQ after that, but if you want your edits incorporated into the initial version that we publish, please send them in before the deadline. Thanks, Alissa On Oct 5, 2014, at 3:34 PM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote:
Thanks for the responses .. I believe we have agreed to have a version out before LA, right? If yes, then maybe we should set a cutoff date for comments, after which we should compile an agreed version to be posted online, and continue discussing any remaining 'relevant' questions ..
Views received so far, which I personally share and Narelle showed flexibility, are in favour of deleting Q9 ..
As for Q7, I personally agree to deleting it, but allow me to propose a middle ground .. It may be changed to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?", although the answer may be the same, it would be stating facts rather than predicting outcome of the process .. thoughts?
Q8 is one of the questions that were listed for the session held at the IGF, but I agree to its deletion ..
Waiting for further comments before compiling a new version ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 2:56 AM To: Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
-----Original Message----- From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 5:01 AM
I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power?
Like I said, I am not wed to the inclusion of the question re invocation of power. As they say, I was merely flying a kite as it is a question I have been frequently receiving.
To the latter question, that surely is up to the communities to propose and decide.
And a good question, indeed.
In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
I agree they are questions people need and want answers to. Whether we should be the ones to provide them is subject to how much time we have as it can be a long diversion...
The risk is that it dilutes our credibility as impartial coordinators of the community finding its own answers.
Best regards
Narelle
--
Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia
Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website
---------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Thanks Alissa .. Dear All .. Please find attached, and in Dropbox, version 3, clean and in track changes .. In the clean version, I have: - accepted edits by Narelle, all extremely helpful, which I believe have also addressed some of the comments received - deleted comments I felt have been addressed - deleted questions 8 & 9, for the time being, following the below exchange - modified question 7 to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?" and would appreciate help in listing IANA functions not under NTIA contact - in addition to Q7, I believe there are unaddressed comments on Q12 & Q18 Looking forward to receiving your comments by 23:59 UTC on October 7 .. Kind Regards --Manal -----Original Message----- From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa@cooperw.in] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 6:52 PM To: Manal Ismail Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: FAQ - deadline for comments All, So that we can get a draft, living version of the FAQ posted to the web site prior to ICANN 51, we need to give Manal a little time to compile outstanding comments and create a clean version. Comments sent to the list about the FAQ prior to 23:59 UTC on October 7 will be incorporated into the initial version we publish on the web. Of course we will continue discussion and refinement of the FAQ after that, but if you want your edits incorporated into the initial version that we publish, please send them in before the deadline. Thanks, Alissa On Oct 5, 2014, at 3:34 PM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote:
Thanks for the responses .. I believe we have agreed to have a version out before LA, right? If yes, then maybe we should set a cutoff date for comments, after which we should compile an agreed version to be posted online, and continue discussing any remaining 'relevant' questions ..
Views received so far, which I personally share and Narelle showed flexibility, are in favour of deleting Q9 ..
As for Q7, I personally agree to deleting it, but allow me to propose a middle ground .. It may be changed to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?", although the answer may be the same, it would be stating facts rather than predicting outcome of the process .. thoughts?
Q8 is one of the questions that were listed for the session held at the IGF, but I agree to its deletion ..
Waiting for further comments before compiling a new version ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 2:56 AM To: Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
-----Original Message----- From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 5:01 AM
I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power?
Like I said, I am not wed to the inclusion of the question re invocation of power. As they say, I was merely flying a kite as it is a question I have been frequently receiving.
To the latter question, that surely is up to the communities to propose and decide.
And a good question, indeed.
In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit
ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the
IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
I agree they are questions people need and want answers to. Whether we should be the ones to provide them is subject to how much time we have as it can be a long diversion...
The risk is that it dilutes our credibility as impartial coordinators of the community finding its own answers.
Best regards
Narelle
--
Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia
Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website
---------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Manal and all: I would suggest that you change this sentence: " The ICG seeks complete proposals from the "operational communities" through processes which are open to participation by "other interested parties". To this: The ICG seeks complete proposals from processes convened by the "operational communities" which are open to participation by "other interested parties." The point being, we are not just getting proposals from the OCs, we are getting them from a process convened by each OC. Confusion about this has already caused trouble and we do not want to give anyone the wrong idea that only directly affected parties can participate in the proposal development process.
-----Original Message----- From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg] Sent: Monday, October 6, 2014 5:16 PM To: Alissa Cooper Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: RE: FAQ - deadline for comments
Thanks Alissa ..
Dear All ..
Please find attached, and in Dropbox, version 3, clean and in track changes .. In the clean version, I have: - accepted edits by Narelle, all extremely helpful, which I believe have also addressed some of the comments received - deleted comments I felt have been addressed - deleted questions 8 & 9, for the time being, following the below exchange - modified question 7 to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?" and would appreciate help in listing IANA functions not under NTIA contact - in addition to Q7, I believe there are unaddressed comments on Q12 & Q18
Looking forward to receiving your comments by 23:59 UTC on October 7 ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa@cooperw.in] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 6:52 PM To: Manal Ismail Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: FAQ - deadline for comments
All,
So that we can get a draft, living version of the FAQ posted to the web site prior to ICANN 51, we need to give Manal a little time to compile outstanding comments and create a clean version. Comments sent to the list about the FAQ prior to 23:59 UTC on October 7 will be incorporated into the initial version we publish on the web. Of course we will continue discussion and refinement of the FAQ after that, but if you want your edits incorporated into the initial version that we publish, please send them in before the deadline.
Thanks, Alissa
On Oct 5, 2014, at 3:34 PM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote:
Thanks for the responses .. I believe we have agreed to have a version out before LA, right? If yes, then maybe we should set a cutoff date for comments, after which we should compile an agreed version to be posted online, and continue discussing any remaining 'relevant' questions ..
Views received so far, which I personally share and Narelle showed flexibility, are in favour of deleting Q9 ..
As for Q7, I personally agree to deleting it, but allow me to propose a middle ground .. It may be changed to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?", although the answer may be the same, it would be stating facts rather than predicting outcome of the process .. thoughts?
Q8 is one of the questions that were listed for the session held at the IGF, but I agree to its deletion ..
Waiting for further comments before compiling a new version ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 2:56 AM To: Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
-----Original Message----- From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 5:01 AM
I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power?
Like I said, I am not wed to the inclusion of the question re invocation of power. As they say, I was merely flying a kite as it is a question I have been frequently receiving.
To the latter question, that surely is up to the communities to propose and decide.
And a good question, indeed.
In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit
ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the
IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
I agree they are questions people need and want answers to. Whether we should be the ones to provide them is subject to how much time we have as it can be a long diversion...
The risk is that it dilutes our credibility as impartial coordinators of the community finding its own answers.
Best regards
Narelle
--
Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia
Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website
---------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Dear Milton .. I have overlooked to acknowledge the below suggestion and have overlooked to add your comment, dated 1 October, in response to Russ' .. Sincere apologies .. Dear All .. Please accept my apologies and let me know if any of your comments or suggestions is neither added nor addressed in the version circulated earlier .. Kind Regards --Manal -----Original Message----- From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 11:56 PM To: Manal Ismail; Alissa Cooper Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; ICG Subject: RE: FAQ - deadline for comments Manal and all: I would suggest that you change this sentence: " The ICG seeks complete proposals from the "operational communities" through processes which are open to participation by "other interested parties". To this: The ICG seeks complete proposals from processes convened by the "operational communities" which are open to participation by "other interested parties." The point being, we are not just getting proposals from the OCs, we are getting them from a process convened by each OC. Confusion about this has already caused trouble and we do not want to give anyone the wrong idea that only directly affected parties can participate in the proposal development process.
-----Original Message----- From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg] Sent: Monday, October 6, 2014 5:16 PM To: Alissa Cooper Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: RE: FAQ - deadline for comments
Thanks Alissa ..
Dear All ..
Please find attached, and in Dropbox, version 3, clean and in track changes .. In the clean version, I have: - accepted edits by Narelle, all extremely helpful, which I believe have also addressed some of the comments received - deleted comments I felt have been addressed - deleted questions 8 & 9, for the time being, following the below exchange - modified question 7 to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?" and would appreciate help in listing IANA functions not under NTIA contact - in addition to Q7, I believe there are unaddressed comments on Q12 & Q18
Looking forward to receiving your comments by 23:59 UTC on October 7 ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa@cooperw.in] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 6:52 PM To: Manal Ismail Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: FAQ - deadline for comments
All,
So that we can get a draft, living version of the FAQ posted to the web site prior to ICANN 51, we need to give Manal a little time to compile outstanding comments and create a clean version. Comments sent
to the list about the FAQ prior to 23:59 UTC on October 7 will be incorporated into the initial version we publish on the web. Of course
we will continue discussion and refinement of the FAQ after that, but if you want your edits incorporated into the initial version that we publish, please send them in before the deadline.
Thanks, Alissa
On Oct 5, 2014, at 3:34 PM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote:
Thanks for the responses .. I believe we have agreed to have a version out before LA, right? If yes, then maybe we should set a cutoff date for comments, after which we should compile an agreed version to be posted online, and continue discussing any remaining 'relevant' questions ..
Views received so far, which I personally share and Narelle showed flexibility, are in favour of deleting Q9 ..
As for Q7, I personally agree to deleting it, but allow me to propose a middle ground .. It may be changed to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?", although the answer may be the same, it would be stating facts rather than predicting outcome of the process .. thoughts?
Q8 is one of the questions that were listed for the session held at the IGF, but I agree to its deletion ..
Waiting for further comments before compiling a new version ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 2:56 AM To: Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
-----Original Message----- From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 5:01 AM
I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power?
Like I said, I am not wed to the inclusion of the question re invocation of power. As they say, I was merely flying a kite as it is a question I have been frequently receiving.
To the latter question, that surely is up to the communities to propose and decide.
And a good question, indeed.
In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit
ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the
IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
I agree they are questions people need and want answers to. Whether we should be the ones to provide them is subject to how much time we have
as it can be a long diversion...
The risk is that it dilutes our credibility as impartial coordinators
of the community finding its own answers.
Best regards
Narelle
--
Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia
Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website
---------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this message is intended
only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant
that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
-----Original Message----- From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg] - modified question 7 to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?" and would appreciate help in listing
I don't support having this question at all. No one asks about that and I don't see its relevance to the transition.
Add to question 15, after the 1st sentence: Our goal is for the operational community proposals to be received by January 15, 2015, and for the transition to be complete by September 30, 2015.
-----Original Message----- From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg] Sent: Monday, October 6, 2014 5:16 PM To: Alissa Cooper Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: RE: FAQ - deadline for comments
Thanks Alissa ..
Dear All ..
Please find attached, and in Dropbox, version 3, clean and in track changes .. In the clean version, I have: - accepted edits by Narelle, all extremely helpful, which I believe have also addressed some of the comments received - deleted comments I felt have been addressed - deleted questions 8 & 9, for the time being, following the below exchange - modified question 7 to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?" and would appreciate help in listing IANA functions not under NTIA contact - in addition to Q7, I believe there are unaddressed comments on Q12 & Q18
Looking forward to receiving your comments by 23:59 UTC on October 7 ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa@cooperw.in] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 6:52 PM To: Manal Ismail Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: FAQ - deadline for comments
All,
So that we can get a draft, living version of the FAQ posted to the web site prior to ICANN 51, we need to give Manal a little time to compile outstanding comments and create a clean version. Comments sent to the list about the FAQ prior to 23:59 UTC on October 7 will be incorporated into the initial version we publish on the web. Of course we will continue discussion and refinement of the FAQ after that, but if you want your edits incorporated into the initial version that we publish, please send them in before the deadline.
Thanks, Alissa
On Oct 5, 2014, at 3:34 PM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote:
Thanks for the responses .. I believe we have agreed to have a version out before LA, right? If yes, then maybe we should set a cutoff date for comments, after which we should compile an agreed version to be posted online, and continue discussing any remaining 'relevant' questions ..
Views received so far, which I personally share and Narelle showed flexibility, are in favour of deleting Q9 ..
As for Q7, I personally agree to deleting it, but allow me to propose a middle ground .. It may be changed to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?", although the answer may be the same, it would be stating facts rather than predicting outcome of the process .. thoughts?
Q8 is one of the questions that were listed for the session held at the IGF, but I agree to its deletion ..
Waiting for further comments before compiling a new version ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 2:56 AM To: Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
-----Original Message----- From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 5:01 AM
I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power?
Like I said, I am not wed to the inclusion of the question re invocation of power. As they say, I was merely flying a kite as it is a question I have been frequently receiving.
To the latter question, that surely is up to the communities to propose and decide.
And a good question, indeed.
In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit
ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the
IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
I agree they are questions people need and want answers to. Whether we should be the ones to provide them is subject to how much time we have as it can be a long diversion...
The risk is that it dilutes our credibility as impartial coordinators of the community finding its own answers.
Best regards
Narelle
--
Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia
Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website
---------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Thanks Milton .. I have noted the below addition and your suggestion to delete Q#7 .. Kind Regards --Manal -----Original Message----- From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 12:10 AM To: Manal Ismail; Alissa Cooper Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; ICG Subject: RE: FAQ - deadline for comments Add to question 15, after the 1st sentence: Our goal is for the operational community proposals to be received by January 15, 2015, and for the transition to be complete by September 30, 2015.
-----Original Message----- From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg] Sent: Monday, October 6, 2014 5:16 PM To: Alissa Cooper Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: RE: FAQ - deadline for comments
Thanks Alissa ..
Dear All ..
Please find attached, and in Dropbox, version 3, clean and in track changes .. In the clean version, I have: - accepted edits by Narelle, all extremely helpful, which I believe have also addressed some of the comments received - deleted comments I felt have been addressed - deleted questions 8 & 9, for the time being, following the below exchange - modified question 7 to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?" and would appreciate help in listing IANA functions not under NTIA contact - in addition to Q7, I believe there are unaddressed comments on Q12 & Q18
Looking forward to receiving your comments by 23:59 UTC on October 7 ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa@cooperw.in] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 6:52 PM To: Manal Ismail Cc: Narelle Clark; Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller; ICG Subject: FAQ - deadline for comments
All,
So that we can get a draft, living version of the FAQ posted to the web site prior to ICANN 51, we need to give Manal a little time to compile outstanding comments and create a clean version. Comments sent
to the list about the FAQ prior to 23:59 UTC on October 7 will be incorporated into the initial version we publish on the web. Of course
we will continue discussion and refinement of the FAQ after that, but if you want your edits incorporated into the initial version that we publish, please send them in before the deadline.
Thanks, Alissa
On Oct 5, 2014, at 3:34 PM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote:
Thanks for the responses .. I believe we have agreed to have a version out before LA, right? If yes, then maybe we should set a cutoff date for comments, after which we should compile an agreed version to be posted online, and continue discussing any remaining 'relevant' questions ..
Views received so far, which I personally share and Narelle showed flexibility, are in favour of deleting Q9 ..
As for Q7, I personally agree to deleting it, but allow me to propose a middle ground .. It may be changed to read "Does IANA carry out functions other than names, number & protocol identifiers?", although the answer may be the same, it would be stating facts rather than predicting outcome of the process .. thoughts?
Q8 is one of the questions that were listed for the session held at the IGF, but I agree to its deletion ..
Waiting for further comments before compiling a new version ..
Kind Regards --Manal
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 2:56 AM To: Kavouss Arasteh; Milton L Mueller Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
-----Original Message----- From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 5:01 AM
I agree with Milton in regard with IANA INVOKING POWER .However, I would like to know whether the replacement of NTIA ,if any, would have the same or would excercise the same power?
Like I said, I am not wed to the inclusion of the question re invocation of power. As they say, I was merely flying a kite as it is a question I have been frequently receiving.
To the latter question, that surely is up to the communities to propose and decide.
And a good question, indeed.
In regard with his second comment, I am not sure that we should limit
ourselcves to say about who were are; what we do; how to respond to our RFP; the respective roles of the ICG, operational communities, USG; how people can get involved in any of those activities. I do not see any problem if we could provide information on IANA, the
IANA transition, and ICANN accountability
I agree they are questions people need and want answers to. Whether we should be the ones to provide them is subject to how much time we have
as it can be a long diversion...
The risk is that it dilutes our credibility as impartial coordinators
of the community finding its own answers.
Best regards
Narelle
--
Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia
Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website
---------------------------------------------
The information contained in or attached to this message is intended
only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant
that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Friday, 3 October 2014 12:47 AM
Questions 7 and 8 are in effect predicting out the outcome of the process and are therefore inappropriate and should be deleted. I also believe we should not include Question 9, as noted in my prior message.
I'm not wed to Q9, so am ambivalent as to its inclusion. That sort of question set is being sought by people, so hopefully it will be compiled elsewhere. Thank you also for the .xxx reminder as I had forgotten (how!?). Re whether 7 and 8 are too predictive, I would like to see more discussion on that. While strictly it is true that it is somewhat predictive of the outcome, isn't it part of the principles that we would like to see preserved in the outcome?
You've deleted what used to be Question 9 1/2. "Can I submit a proposal..." probably because you think it is answered by your new question 12 (How can I participate?) I object to this - I get asked the more specific question all the time and it relates directly to how ordinary people relate to the ICG and its process.
It is covered explicitly in : 15. Can I submit my own proposal for how the IANA transition should take place? Regards Narelle -- Narelle Clark Director of Operations - Deputy CEO Australian Communications Consumer Action Network Suite 4.02 Level 4 55 Mountain St Ultimo NSW 2007 Australia Follow us on twitter @ACCAN_AU Sign up for our weekly WebNews Visit our website --------------------------------------------- The information contained in or attached to this message is intended only for the people it is addressed to. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this information is unauthorised and prohibited. This information may be confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail and any attachments. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network does not warrant that the information in this e-mail or any attachments are free from any viruses, defects, errors, interception or interference.
participants (7)
-
Alissa Cooper -
Joe Alhadeff -
Kavouss Arasteh -
Manal Ismail -
Milton L Mueller -
Narelle Clark -
Patrik Fältström