announcement re community comments
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
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
The bulk of the time during the Feb 6-7 meeting will be devoted to assessing the two proposals we have received. So for comments to be considered during those assessments we need to have them before the meeting. I don’t view this as a short nor absolute deadline. We put the RFP out in September and it included the notice about community comments — both how to submit them and that all interested parties should direct their comments to the communities themselves first and foremost. So everyone has known for a very long time how to send comments. Furthermore, we received both of these proposals two or more weeks ago, so anyone who was for whatever reason waiting to send their comments to us has had plenty of time to do that too. And we’re not saying that we’re closing down the forum, just that if comments are to be incorporated into the initial assessment phase, we need to see them before we do the assessments. We have many further phases of assessment and comment planned in our timeline. Alissa On Jan 29, 2015, at 10:56 AM, wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de wrote:
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
Just want to reiterate my concerns that this could "open the floodgates," for complaints, particularly when the Names community submits its proposal. Once that is submitted, will there be an equivalent "window" for complaint submission? Thanks- J. From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in<mailto:alissa@cooperw.in>> Date: Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 13:07 To: "wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>" <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>> Cc: ICG List <internal-cg@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments The bulk of the time during the Feb 6-7 meeting will be devoted to assessing the two proposals we have received. So for comments to be considered during those assessments we need to have them before the meeting. I don't view this as a short nor absolute deadline. We put the RFP out in September and it included the notice about community comments - both how to submit them and that all interested parties should direct their comments to the communities themselves first and foremost. So everyone has known for a very long time how to send comments. Furthermore, we received both of these proposals two or more weeks ago, so anyone who was for whatever reason waiting to send their comments to us has had plenty of time to do that too. And we're not saying that we're closing down the forum, just that if comments are to be incorporated into the initial assessment phase, we need to see them before we do the assessments. We have many further phases of assessment and comment planned in our timeline. Alissa On Jan 29, 2015, at 10:56 AM, wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote: 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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Hi James, On Jan 29, 2015, at 11:16 AM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com> wrote:
Just want to reiterate my concerns that this could “open the floodgates,” for complaints, particularly when the Names community submits its proposal. Once that is submitted, will there be an equivalent “window” for complaint submission?
Are you saying that setting a deadline opens the floodgates? Or the fact that the RFP included an option for people to submit comments at all did that? I tend to think that since we included the option in the RFP, all we’re doing here is providing a way for our own assessment process to not be entirely open-ended. I expect we will want to achieve the same with the names proposal, but we can make an evaluation when the time comes and in light of whatever else goes on between now and then. We have received only a handful of comments and most of them are from a single individual, so we need not over-engineer this in my opinion. Alissa
Thanks—
J.
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Date: Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 13:07 To: "wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de" <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> Cc: ICG List <internal-cg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments
The bulk of the time during the Feb 6-7 meeting will be devoted to assessing the two proposals we have received. So for comments to be considered during those assessments we need to have them before the meeting.
I don’t view this as a short nor absolute deadline. We put the RFP out in September and it included the notice about community comments — both how to submit them and that all interested parties should direct their comments to the communities themselves first and foremost. So everyone has known for a very long time how to send comments. Furthermore, we received both of these proposals two or more weeks ago, so anyone who was for whatever reason waiting to send their comments to us has had plenty of time to do that too. And we’re not saying that we’re closing down the forum, just that if comments are to be incorporated into the initial assessment phase, we need to see them before we do the assessments. We have many further phases of assessment and comment planned in our timeline.
Alissa
On Jan 29, 2015, at 10:56 AM, wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de wrote:
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
HI Alissa: I meant that referring folks to that line in the RFP could be seen as an invitation for comments. Thanks— J. From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in<mailto:alissa@cooperw.in>> Date: Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 13:44 To: James Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>> Cc: "wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>" <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>>, ICG List <internal-cg@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments Hi James, On Jan 29, 2015, at 11:16 AM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>> wrote: Just want to reiterate my concerns that this could “open the floodgates,” for complaints, particularly when the Names community submits its proposal. Once that is submitted, will there be an equivalent “window” for complaint submission? Are you saying that setting a deadline opens the floodgates? Or the fact that the RFP included an option for people to submit comments at all did that? I tend to think that since we included the option in the RFP, all we’re doing here is providing a way for our own assessment process to not be entirely open-ended. I expect we will want to achieve the same with the names proposal, but we can make an evaluation when the time comes and in light of whatever else goes on between now and then. We have received only a handful of comments and most of them are from a single individual, so we need not over-engineer this in my opinion. Alissa Thanks— J. From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in<mailto:alissa@cooperw.in>> Date: Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 13:07 To: "wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>" <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>> Cc: ICG List <internal-cg@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments The bulk of the time during the Feb 6-7 meeting will be devoted to assessing the two proposals we have received. So for comments to be considered during those assessments we need to have them before the meeting. I don’t view this as a short nor absolute deadline. We put the RFP out in September and it included the notice about community comments — both how to submit them and that all interested parties should direct their comments to the communities themselves first and foremost. So everyone has known for a very long time how to send comments. Furthermore, we received both of these proposals two or more weeks ago, so anyone who was for whatever reason waiting to send their comments to us has had plenty of time to do that too. And we’re not saying that we’re closing down the forum, just that if comments are to be incorporated into the initial assessment phase, we need to see them before we do the assessments. We have many further phases of assessment and comment planned in our timeline. Alissa On Jan 29, 2015, at 10:56 AM, wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote: 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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Thanks for clarification, Alissa. I seem to have overlooked your reference to step I of the finalization process. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Alissa Cooper Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:07 PM To: wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de Cc: ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments The bulk of the time during the Feb 6-7 meeting will be devoted to assessing the two proposals we have received. So for comments to be considered during those assessments we need to have them before the meeting. I don’t view this as a short nor absolute deadline. We put the RFP out in September and it included the notice about community comments — both how to submit them and that all interested parties should direct their comments to the communities themselves first and foremost. So everyone has known for a very long time how to send comments. Furthermore, we received both of these proposals two or more weeks ago, so anyone who was for whatever reason waiting to send their comments to us has had plenty of time to do that too. And we’re not saying that we’re closing down the forum, just that if comments are to be incorporated into the initial assessment phase, we need to see them before we do the assessments. We have many further phases of assessment and comment planned in our timeline. Alissa On Jan 29, 2015, at 10:56 AM, wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de wrote: 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
Wolf-Ulrich As I understood Alissa’s announcement, it only refers to the protocols and numbers proposals. I do not understand why you are concerned about the CWG timeline, W-U, because the CWG deals only with the names proposal and the Feb 4th deadline applies to the protocols and numbers proposals. I support the Feb 4 deadline for numbers and protocols. --MM From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@t-online.de Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 1:56 PM To: Alissa Cooper Cc: ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments 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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
I have forwarded the announcement to the secretariat for posting to the web site. Alissa On Jan 29, 2015, at 9:38 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> wrote:
Wolf-Ulrich As I understood Alissa’s announcement, it only refers to the protocols and numbers proposals. I do not understand why you are concerned about the CWG timeline, W-U, because the CWG deals only with the names proposal and the Feb 4th deadline applies to the protocols and numbers proposals.
I support the Feb 4 deadline for numbers and protocols. --MM
From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@t-online.de Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 1:56 PM To: Alissa Cooper Cc: ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments
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
As I mentioned to Alissa I’ve overlooked the reference to step 1 of the finalization process. I agree to discuss the proposals and related comments on 06 Feb. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Milton L Mueller Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 6:38 AM To: Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@t-online.de ; Alissa Cooper Cc: ICG Subject: RE: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments Wolf-Ulrich As I understood Alissa’s announcement, it only refers to the protocols and numbers proposals. I do not understand why you are concerned about the CWG timeline, W-U, because the CWG deals only with the names proposal and the Feb 4th deadline applies to the protocols and numbers proposals. I support the Feb 4 deadline for numbers and protocols. --MM From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@t-online.de Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 1:56 PM To: Alissa Cooper Cc: ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments 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
FYI. https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-02-02-en On Jan 31, 2015, at 2:01 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
As I mentioned to Alissa I’ve overlooked the reference to step 1 of the finalization process. I agree to discuss the proposals and related comments on 06 Feb.
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Milton L Mueller Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 6:38 AM To: Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@t-online.de ; Alissa Cooper Cc: ICG Subject: RE: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments
Wolf-Ulrich As I understood Alissa’s announcement, it only refers to the protocols and numbers proposals. I do not understand why you are concerned about the CWG timeline, W-U, because the CWG deals only with the names proposal and the Feb 4th deadline applies to the protocols and numbers proposals.
I support the Feb 4 deadline for numbers and protocols. --MM
From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben@t-online.de Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 1:56 PM To: Alissa Cooper Cc: ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] announcement re community comments
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
participants (5)
-
Alissa Cooper -
James M. Bladel -
Milton L Mueller -
Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben＠t-online.de -
WUKnoben