Colleagues: As a result of the consultation process, a new consensus has emerged: There is now support for a Chair and Alternate. I have taken the liberty off accommodating a minority request for co-chairs by allowing the Chair to have the Alternate play a supporting role to share the work as they see fit between themselves, but the Chair is the primary decision-maker between the two. I have adapted the previous document to reflect that. Attached is a red line version, below is a clean text. In the process of comment Alissa Cooper has been the only candidate for Chair spontaneously suggested. There is a request of the existing volunteers or any new volunteers to clarify their position related to what role they are interested in; please note the timeline below. One question as to process. Online, the only humming comes from the air conditioning; therefore the process of achieving consensus is the rough consensus among those who post an opinion. To date the above reflects the consensus comments. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ *_Role Of The Chair-Alternate (Draft v 1.0)_* *Introduction* As a result of the consultation since the first meeting of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) a new consensus has emerged among those that have commented.There will be one Chair and an Alternate.. A call for volunteers remains open among committee members for Chair and Alternate. It continues to be agreed that the roles of the Chair/Alternate, supported by the secretariat, would be mostly related to the organization and running of the coordination group – keeping the trains running on time was a description often used by analogy.The ability of Chair/Alternate to execute the needed functions and work collaboratively was seen as essential to the role.It was also suggested by some that considerations of diversity would be desirable in the choice of officers. Finally it was suggested that a more precise resume of the roles would be useful, which is the purpose of this draft. *Comment and Selection Process* This Draft, Chair-Alternate (draft 1.0) has incorporated the requested changes from commentators, with one compromise – there was a minority request for more than one chair to share the work.I have proposed that the Chair and Alternate can self-organize the work between themselves.This maintains one clear Chair, while allowing for the Alternate to support the chair as well. The final deadline for comments and additional volunteers by 2:00PM CET Thursday July 24th to the list under the subject “Role of the Chair-Alternate draft v 1.0 for comment and volunteers”.The Role of the Chair-Alternate document and list of volunteers will be posted on Thursday evening.ICG members must make their preferences for Chair and Alternate known one week from that date (COB July 31).If ICG members are in agreement (please suggest alternative procedures to the list, if not), preferences can be manifested by sending a post to the list with your preferred candidate for each role.. We would ask that all volunteers be sure to have submitted their bios to the secretariat as requested so that they are available for review.Any volunteer wishing to provide further information may do so by e-mail to the list.To date, there have been 5 volunteers: Russ Housley (IAB) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Partrik Faltstrom (SSAC) Keith Drazek (GTLd Registries) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC) Since the consultation, a majority of the commentators, including some of the other volunteers, have supported Alissa Cooper to be Chair (the only person mentioned to date for the revised role), citing her exemplary work in preparing for and executing the de-facto chair role of the first meeting.Alissa has indicated her willingness to serve if that is the will of the group.Furthermore, there have been no suggestions for modification to the role description. In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions?Obviously, Alissa has been nominated for Chair and accepted, if so confirmed, so that is clarified as to her intent. *Chair/Alternate Processes and Responsibilities:* Operational Processes ·There will be a Chair and an Alternate (selected from volunteers) that will serve for the duration of this exercise.The Alternate will be able to act as chair if the Chair is unavailable and will also be able to support the Chair in related activities as needed. ·The ICG will reserve the right to change the number of the Chair/Alternate, their role or who will serve, as appropriate, through its established operating procedure of rough consensus. ·If for any reason the Chair or Alternate is no longer able or willing to serve in that capacity, they will inform the secretariat who will communicate this to the ICG and request that it seek volunteers to fill the vacancy.. ·The Chair and Alternate are explicitly able to participate in ICG discussions on their own or their constituency’s behalf and are just requested to take appropriate precaution that there is no confusion related to their role in such participation. ·The operational modalities of the Chair and Alternate, who is undertaking what function, moderating the conversation for example, maintaining the que…, is left to the Chair’s self-organization.It was the view of the ICG that we did not wish to micro-manage the Chair operations, but ICG obviously reserves the right to suggest or make changes pursuant to rough consensus. Responsibilities: ·The role of the Chair/Alternate is to assure that meetings and conference calls are properly scheduled, planned, prepared, organized and efficiently conducted including: ofinalizing this version of the timeline and other work in process oplanning for appropriate outreach and consultation otimely developing agendas in appropriate consultation with ICG, oorganizing volunteers (for themes, discussion topics and other needed functions) omoderating discussion and other elements of meeting function ooverseeing minutes and summaries being taken, reviewed and circulated in a timely fashion supported by the secretariat as well as the drafting, circulation and publication of other needed papers and documents, and oassuring that action items are captured, completed or otherwise followed up; including between calls and meetings. ·Chair/Alternate will be appropriately supported by the Secretariat in the executing these functions. ·Chair/Alternate are not meant to have independent decision-making in substantive issues of the ICG on behalf of the group, but are rather the coordinators of the process elements related to the calls, meetings and related functions.Decisions must remain inclusive and collaborative. There was discussion, however, that where rough consensus does not emerge organically or cannot be recognized, the Chair/Alternate will lead the ICG in a process to finalize rough consensus. ·There is no current spokesperson or press liaison role associated to the Chair/Alternate, but the ICG may revisit that function as needed and subject to whatever conditions (only speak from agreed points, etc) it feels appropriate. ·Chair/Alternate should also recognize that by virtue of their title they are clothed with apparent authority and should make clear across all situations what their role and representative capacity is (on behalf of themselves, their consistency…) ·Chair/Alternate need to be mindful of and support the needs of transparency of this process in the planning, organization, conduct and reporting back of calls and meetings as well as the drafting of papers and other supporting documents
Looks like an effective plan to me. I remain concerned that this is too much effort for a pair, and would be happy with a second ‘alternate’. Since I’m not offering to be either at this stage, I am not too concerned either way, but will monitor and lend an ear should the designated parties start to feel the load. A couple of typos found, amended and below in the attached and one minor clarification. [When do we use cloud file sharing for this?] regards Narelle From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff Sent: Wednesday, 23 July 2014 7:22 PM To: ICANN Internal Subject: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 Colleagues: As a result of the consultation process, a new consensus has emerged: There is now support for a Chair and Alternate. I have taken the liberty off accommodating a minority request for co-chairs by allowing the Chair to have the Alternate play a supporting role to share the work as they see fit between themselves, but the Chair is the primary decision-maker between the two. I have adapted the previous document to reflect that. Attached is a red line version, below is a clean text. In the process of comment Alissa Cooper has been the only candidate for Chair spontaneously suggested. There is a request of the existing volunteers or any new volunteers to clarify their position related to what role they are interested in; please note the timeline below. One question as to process. Online, the only humming comes from the air conditioning; therefore the process of achieving consensus is the rough consensus among those who post an opinion. To date the above reflects the consensus comments. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Role Of The Chair-Alternate (Draft v 1.0) [Amended – NC] Introduction As a result of the consultation since the first meeting of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) a new consensus has emerged among those that have commented. There will be one Chair and an Alternate.. A call for volunteers remains open among committee members for Chair and Alternate. It continues to be agreed that the roles of the Chair/Alternate, supported by the secretariat, would be mostly related to the organization and running of the coordination group – keeping the trains running on time was a description often used by analogy. The ability of Chair/Alternate to execute the needed functions and work collaboratively was seen as essential to the role. It was also suggested by some that considerations of diversity would be desirable in the choice of officers. Finally it was suggested that a more precise resume of the roles would be useful, which is the purpose of this draft. Comment and Selection Process This Draft, Chair-Alternate (draft 1.0) has incorporated the requested changes from commentators, with one compromise – there was a minority request for more than one chair to share the work. I have proposed that the Chair and Alternate can self-organize the work between themselves. This maintains one clear Chair, while allowing for the Alternate to support the chair as well. The final deadline for comments and additional volunteers by 2:00PM CET Thursday July 24th to the list under the subject “Role of the Chair-Alternate draft v 1.0 for comment and volunteers”. The Role of the Chair-Alternate document and list of volunteers will be posted on Thursday evening. ICG members must make their preferences for Chair and Alternate known one week from that date (COB July 31). If ICG members are in agreement (please suggest alternative procedures to the list, if not), preferences can be manifested by sending a post to the list with your preferred candidate for each role.. We would ask that all volunteers be sure to have submitted their bios to the secretariat as requested so that they are available for review. Any volunteer wishing to provide further information may do so by e-mail to the list. To date, there have been 5 volunteers: Russ Housley (IAB) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Partrik Faltstrom (SSAC) Keith Drazek (GTLd Registries) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC) Since the consultation, a majority of the commentators, including some of the other volunteers, have supported Alissa Cooper to be Chair (the only person mentioned to date for the revised role), citing her exemplary work in preparing for and executing the de-facto chair role of the first meeting. Alissa has indicated her willingness to serve if that is the will of the group. Furthermore, there have been no suggestions for modification to the role description. In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions? Obviously, Alissa has been nominated for Chair and accepted, if so confirmed, so that is clarified as to her intent. Chair/Alternate Processes and Responsibilities: Operational Processes • There will be a Chair and an Alternate (selected from volunteers) that will serve for the duration of this exercise. The Alternate will be able to act as chair if the Chair is unavailable and will also be able to support the Chair in related activities as needed. • The ICG will reserve the right to change the number of the Chair/Alternate, their role or who will serve, as appropriate, through its established operating procedure of rough consensus. • If for any reason the Chair or Alternate is no longer able or willing to serve in that capacity, they will inform the secretariat who will communicate this to the ICG and request that it seek volunteers to fill the vacancy.. • The Chair and Alternate are explicitly able to participate in ICG discussions on their own or their constituency’s behalf and are just requested to take appropriate precaution that there is no confusion related to their role in such participation. • The operational modalities of the Chair and Alternate, who is undertaking what function, moderating the conversation for example, maintaining the queue…, is left to the Chair’s self-organization. It was the view of the ICG that we did not wish to micro-manage the Chair operations, but ICG obviously reserves the right to suggest or make changes pursuant to rough consensus. Responsibilities: • The role of the Chair/Alternate is to assure that meetings and conference calls are properly scheduled, planned, prepared, organized and efficiently conducted including: o finalizing this version of the timeline and other work in process o planning for appropriate outreach and consultation for the ICG as a whole o timely developing agendas in appropriate consultation with ICG, o organizing volunteers (for themes, discussion topics and other needed functions) o moderating discussion and other elements of meeting function o overseeing minutes and summaries being taken, reviewed and circulated in a timely fashion supported by the secretariat as well as the drafting, circulation and publication of other needed papers and documents, and o assuring that action items are captured, completed or otherwise followed up; including between calls and meetings. • Chair/Alternate will be appropriately supported by the Secretariat in the executing these functions. • Chair/Alternate are not meant to have independent decision-making in substantive issues of the ICG on behalf of the group, but are rather the coordinators of the process elements related to the calls, meetings and related functions. Decisions must remain inclusive and collaborative. There was discussion, however, that where rough consensus does not emerge organically or cannot be recognized, the Chair/Alternate will lead the ICG in a process to finalize rough consensus. • There is no current spokesperson or press liaison role associated to the Chair/Alternate, but the ICG may revisit that function as needed and subject to whatever conditions (only speak from agreed points, etc) it feels appropriate. • Chair/Alternate should also recognize that by virtue of their title they are clothed with apparent authority and should make clear across all situations what their role and representative capacity is (on behalf of themselves, their constituency, drawing from agreed positions…) • Chair/Alternate need to be mindful of and support the needs of transparency of this process in the planning, organization, conduct and reporting back of calls and meetings as well as the drafting of papers and other supporting documents
We could add the following to address those concerns: Chair may call for additional volunteers to support the work of the chair, including requesting the ICG to more formally seek volunteers for vice chair positions which the group shall designate related to specific work , should the amount of work prove problematic to manage for the Chair and Alternate. Joe On 7/23/2014 5:37 AM, Narelle Clark wrote:
Looks like an effective plan to me. I remain concerned that this is too much effort for a pair, and would be happy with a second ‘alternate’. Since I’m not offering to be either at this stage, I am not too concerned either way, but will monitor and lend an ear should the designated parties start to feel the load.
A couple of typos found, amended and below in the attached and one minor clarification.
[When do we use cloud file sharing for this?]
regards
Narelle
*From:*internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *joseph alhadeff *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 July 2014 7:22 PM *To:* ICANN Internal *Subject:* [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
Colleagues:
As a result of the consultation process, a new consensus has emerged:
There is now support for a Chair and Alternate. I have taken the liberty off accommodating a minority request for co-chairs by allowing the Chair to have the Alternate play a supporting role to share the work as they see fit between themselves, but the Chair is the primary decision-maker between the two.
I have adapted the previous document to reflect that. Attached is a red line version, below is a clean text.
In the process of comment Alissa Cooper has been the only candidate for Chair spontaneously suggested. There is a request of the existing volunteers or any new volunteers to clarify their position related to what role they are interested in; please note the timeline below.
One question as to process. Online, the only humming comes from the air conditioning; therefore the process of achieving consensus is the rough consensus among those who post an opinion. To date the above reflects the consensus comments.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
*_Role Of The Chair-Alternate (Draft v 1.0)_*
[Amended – NC]
*Introduction*
As a result of the consultation since the first meeting of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) a new consensus has emerged among those that have commented. There will be one Chair and an Alternate.. A call for volunteers remains open among committee members for Chair and Alternate. It continues to be agreed that the roles of the Chair/Alternate, supported by the secretariat, would be mostly related to the organization and running of the coordination group – keeping the trains running on time was a description often used by analogy. The ability of Chair/Alternate to execute the needed functions and work collaboratively was seen as essential to the role. It was also suggested by some that considerations of diversity would be desirable in the choice of officers. Finally it was suggested that a more precise resume of the roles would be useful, which is the purpose of this draft.
*Comment and Selection Process*
This Draft, Chair-Alternate (draft 1.0) has incorporated the requested changes from commentators, with one compromise – there was a minority request for more than one chair to share the work. I have proposed that the Chair and Alternate can self-organize the work between themselves. This maintains one clear Chair, while allowing for the Alternate to support the chair as well.
The final deadline for comments and additional volunteers by 2:00PM CET Thursday July 24th to the list under the subject “Role of the Chair-Alternate draft v 1.0 for comment and volunteers”. The Role of the Chair-Alternate document and list of volunteers will be posted on Thursday evening. ICG members must make their preferences for Chair and Alternate known one week from that date (COB July 31). If ICG members are in agreement (please suggest alternative procedures to the list, if not), preferences can be manifested by sending a post to the list with your preferred candidate for each role.. We would ask that all volunteers be sure to have submitted their bios to the secretariat as requested so that they are available for review. Any volunteer wishing to provide further information may do so by e-mail to the list. To date, there have been 5 volunteers:
Russ Housley (IAB) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Partrik Faltstrom (SSAC) Keith Drazek (GTLd Registries) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC)
Since the consultation, a majority of the commentators, including some of the other volunteers, have supported Alissa Cooper to be Chair (the only person mentioned to date for the revised role), citing her exemplary work in preparing for and executing the de-facto chair role of the first meeting. Alissa has indicated her willingness to serve if that is the will of the group. Furthermore, there have been no suggestions for modification to the role description.
In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions? Obviously, Alissa has been nominated for Chair and accepted, if so confirmed, so that is clarified as to her intent.
*Chair/Alternate Processes and Responsibilities:*
Operational Processes
·There will be a Chair and an Alternate (selected from volunteers) that will serve for the duration of this exercise. The Alternate will be able to act as chair if the Chair is unavailable and will also be able to support the Chair in related activities as needed.
·The ICG will reserve the right to change the number of the Chair/Alternate, their role or who will serve, as appropriate, through its established operating procedure of rough consensus.
·If for any reason the Chair or Alternate is no longer able or willing to serve in that capacity, they will inform the secretariat who will communicate this to the ICG and request that it seek volunteers to fill the vacancy..
·The Chair and Alternate are explicitly able to participate in ICG discussions on their own or their constituency’s behalf and are just requested to take appropriate precaution that there is no confusion related to their role in such participation.
·The operational modalities of the Chair and Alternate, who is undertaking what function, moderating the conversation for example, maintaining the queue…, is left to the Chair’s self-organization. It was the view of the ICG that we did not wish to micro-manage the Chair operations, but ICG obviously reserves the right to suggest or make changes pursuant to rough consensus.
Responsibilities:
·The role of the Chair/Alternate is to assure that meetings and conference calls are properly scheduled, planned, prepared, organized and efficiently conducted including:
ofinalizing this version of the timeline and other work in process
oplanning for appropriate outreach and consultationfor the ICG as a whole
otimely developing agendas in appropriate consultation with ICG,
oorganizing volunteers (for themes, discussion topics and other needed functions)
omoderating discussion and other elements of meeting function
ooverseeing minutes and summaries being taken, reviewed and circulated in a timely fashion supported by the secretariat as well as the drafting, circulation and publication of other needed papers and documents, and
oassuring that action items are captured, completed or otherwise followed up; including between calls and meetings.
·Chair/Alternate will be appropriately supported by the Secretariat in the executing these functions.
·Chair/Alternate are not meant to have independent decision-making in substantive issues of the ICG on behalf of the group, but are rather the coordinators of the process elements related to the calls, meetings and related functions. Decisions must remain inclusive and collaborative. There was discussion, however, that where rough consensus does not emerge organically or cannot be recognized, the Chair/Alternate will lead the ICG in a process to finalize rough consensus.
·There is no current spokesperson or press liaison role associated to the Chair/Alternate, but the ICG may revisit that function as needed and subject to whatever conditions (only speak from agreed points, etc) it feels appropriate.
·Chair/Alternate should also recognize that by virtue of their title they are clothed with apparent authority and should make clear across all situations what their role and representative capacity is (on behalf of themselves, their constituency, drawing from agreed positions…)
·Chair/Alternate need to be mindful of and support the needs of transparency of this process in the planning, organization, conduct and reporting back of calls and meetings as well as the drafting of papers and other supporting documents
Yes, that text works for me. Narelle From: joseph alhadeff [mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com] Sent: Wednesday, 23 July 2014 8:21 PM To: Narelle Clark Cc: ICANN Internal Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 We could add the following to address those concerns: Chair may call for additional volunteers to support the work of the chair, including requesting the ICG to more formally seek volunteers for vice chair positions which the group shall designate related to specific work , should the amount of work prove problematic to manage for the Chair and Alternate. Joe On 7/23/2014 5:37 AM, Narelle Clark wrote: Looks like an effective plan to me. I remain concerned that this is too much effort for a pair, and would be happy with a second ‘alternate’. Since I’m not offering to be either at this stage, I am not too concerned either way, but will monitor and lend an ear should the designated parties start to feel the load. A couple of typos found, amended and below in the attached and one minor clarification. [When do we use cloud file sharing for this?] regards Narelle From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff Sent: Wednesday, 23 July 2014 7:22 PM To: ICANN Internal Subject: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 Colleagues: As a result of the consultation process, a new consensus has emerged: There is now support for a Chair and Alternate. I have taken the liberty off accommodating a minority request for co-chairs by allowing the Chair to have the Alternate play a supporting role to share the work as they see fit between themselves, but the Chair is the primary decision-maker between the two. I have adapted the previous document to reflect that. Attached is a red line version, below is a clean text. In the process of comment Alissa Cooper has been the only candidate for Chair spontaneously suggested. There is a request of the existing volunteers or any new volunteers to clarify their position related to what role they are interested in; please note the timeline below. One question as to process. Online, the only humming comes from the air conditioning; therefore the process of achieving consensus is the rough consensus among those who post an opinion. To date the above reflects the consensus comments. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Role Of The Chair-Alternate (Draft v 1.0) [Amended – NC] Introduction As a result of the consultation since the first meeting of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) a new consensus has emerged among those that have commented. There will be one Chair and an Alternate.. A call for volunteers remains open among committee members for Chair and Alternate. It continues to be agreed that the roles of the Chair/Alternate, supported by the secretariat, would be mostly related to the organization and running of the coordination group – keeping the trains running on time was a description often used by analogy. The ability of Chair/Alternate to execute the needed functions and work collaboratively was seen as essential to the role. It was also suggested by some that considerations of diversity would be desirable in the choice of officers. Finally it was suggested that a more precise resume of the roles would be useful, which is the purpose of this draft. Comment and Selection Process This Draft, Chair-Alternate (draft 1.0) has incorporated the requested changes from commentators, with one compromise – there was a minority request for more than one chair to share the work. I have proposed that the Chair and Alternate can self-organize the work between themselves. This maintains one clear Chair, while allowing for the Alternate to support the chair as well. The final deadline for comments and additional volunteers by 2:00PM CET Thursday July 24th to the list under the subject “Role of the Chair-Alternate draft v 1.0 for comment and volunteers”. The Role of the Chair-Alternate document and list of volunteers will be posted on Thursday evening. ICG members must make their preferences for Chair and Alternate known one week from that date (COB July 31). If ICG members are in agreement (please suggest alternative procedures to the list, if not), preferences can be manifested by sending a post to the list with your preferred candidate for each role.. We would ask that all volunteers be sure to have submitted their bios to the secretariat as requested so that they are available for review. Any volunteer wishing to provide further information may do so by e-mail to the list. To date, there have been 5 volunteers: Russ Housley (IAB) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Partrik Faltstrom (SSAC) Keith Drazek (GTLd Registries) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC) Since the consultation, a majority of the commentators, including some of the other volunteers, have supported Alissa Cooper to be Chair (the only person mentioned to date for the revised role), citing her exemplary work in preparing for and executing the de-facto chair role of the first meeting. Alissa has indicated her willingness to serve if that is the will of the group. Furthermore, there have been no suggestions for modification to the role description. In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions? Obviously, Alissa has been nominated for Chair and accepted, if so confirmed, so that is clarified as to her intent. Chair/Alternate Processes and Responsibilities: Operational Processes • There will be a Chair and an Alternate (selected from volunteers) that will serve for the duration of this exercise. The Alternate will be able to act as chair if the Chair is unavailable and will also be able to support the Chair in related activities as needed. • The ICG will reserve the right to change the number of the Chair/Alternate, their role or who will serve, as appropriate, through its established operating procedure of rough consensus. • If for any reason the Chair or Alternate is no longer able or willing to serve in that capacity, they will inform the secretariat who will communicate this to the ICG and request that it seek volunteers to fill the vacancy.. • The Chair and Alternate are explicitly able to participate in ICG discussions on their own or their constituency’s behalf and are just requested to take appropriate precaution that there is no confusion related to their role in such participation. • The operational modalities of the Chair and Alternate, who is undertaking what function, moderating the conversation for example, maintaining the queue…, is left to the Chair’s self-organization. It was the view of the ICG that we did not wish to micro-manage the Chair operations, but ICG obviously reserves the right to suggest or make changes pursuant to rough consensus. Responsibilities: • The role of the Chair/Alternate is to assure that meetings and conference calls are properly scheduled, planned, prepared, organized and efficiently conducted including: o finalizing this version of the timeline and other work in process o planning for appropriate outreach and consultation for the ICG as a whole o timely developing agendas in appropriate consultation with ICG, o organizing volunteers (for themes, discussion topics and other needed functions) o moderating discussion and other elements of meeting function o overseeing minutes and summaries being taken, reviewed and circulated in a timely fashion supported by the secretariat as well as the drafting, circulation and publication of other needed papers and documents, and o assuring that action items are captured, completed or otherwise followed up; including between calls and meetings. • Chair/Alternate will be appropriately supported by the Secretariat in the executing these functions. • Chair/Alternate are not meant to have independent decision-making in substantive issues of the ICG on behalf of the group, but are rather the coordinators of the process elements related to the calls, meetings and related functions. Decisions must remain inclusive and collaborative. There was discussion, however, that where rough consensus does not emerge organically or cannot be recognized, the Chair/Alternate will lead the ICG in a process to finalize rough consensus. • There is no current spokesperson or press liaison role associated to the Chair/Alternate, but the ICG may revisit that function as needed and subject to whatever conditions (only speak from agreed points, etc) it feels appropriate. • Chair/Alternate should also recognize that by virtue of their title they are clothed with apparent authority and should make clear across all situations what their role and representative capacity is (on behalf of themselves, their constituency, drawing from agreed positions…) • Chair/Alternate need to be mindful of and support the needs of transparency of this process in the planning, organization, conduct and reporting back of calls and meetings as well as the drafting of papers and other supporting documents
Please find attached my comments on the Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group and some proposed revisions. Best, Richard Hill
Dear all, Richard Hill has submitted comments on the draft charter (attached). Given that he does not have posting rights to this mailing list, we are forwarding his original note to ensure delivery. Best, Ergys Begin forwarded message: From: Richard Hill <rhill@hill-a.ch<mailto:rhill@hill-a.ch>> Date: July 23, 2014 at 12:30:01 PM GMT+2 To: "Ianaxfer@Elists. Isoc. Org" <ianaxfer@elists.isoc.org<mailto:ianaxfer@elists.isoc.org>>, "Ianatransition@Icann. Org" <ianatransition@icann.org<mailto:ianatransition@icann.org>>, ICANN Internal <internal-cg@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg@icann.org>> Cc: "Rhill@Alum. Mit. Edu" <rhill@alum.mit.edu<mailto:rhill@alum.mit.edu>> Subject: [Internal-cg] Comments on Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group Reply-To: <rhill@hill-a.ch<mailto:rhill@hill-a.ch>> Please find attached my comments on the Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group and some proposed revisions. Best, Richard Hill
I do not agree with two aspects of your proposed change to the first sentence of the charter. The current wording says a lot about what the ICG does not do, and your rewording looses that. However, I do like the part that adds support of the global Internet community for the proposal. Russ On Jul 23, 2014, at 6:30 AM, Richard Hill wrote:
Please find attached my comments on the Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group and some proposed revisions.
Best, Richard Hill <IANA ICG charter.pdf>
I would oppose most of the proposed changes in the preamble, where we define the deliverable of the group. The changes in the first sentence are mere word-smithing and a matter of style and I prefer to directness of the original version. All but one of the other proposed changes in the first paragraph seem ill-advised to me. The IANA functions are being transferred to some set of actors in the Internet community; our job is to ensure that the proposal makes those actors accountable to the global MS community (whatever that is) but not to transfer them to the global MS comm as such. Thus, I prefer "Internet community" to "global MS community." Further, "global MS community" is a mouthful and a bit of jargon to an ordinary person; let's just say what we mean. I do agree that the final proposal we submit should include dissenting views. But given that our job is to assist in and compile an executable proposal it makes no sense to include any and all proposals that were either not workable nor not supported. -----Original Message----- From: ianatransition-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ianatransition-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hill Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:30 AM To: Ianaxfer@Elists. Isoc. Org; Ianatransition@Icann. Org; ICANN Internal Cc: Rhill@Alum. Mit. Edu Subject: [ianatransition] Comments on Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group Please find attached my comments on the Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group and some proposed revisions. Best, Richard Hill
I would suggest that the proposal be a clean proposal of the rough consensus, but include a report contain other views not accommodated in the proposal with a description of how rough consensus was achieved or what it represents. On 7/23/2014 9:11 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
I would oppose most of the proposed changes in the preamble, where we define the deliverable of the group. The changes in the first sentence are mere word-smithing and a matter of style and I prefer to directness of the original version. All but one of the other proposed changes in the first paragraph seem ill-advised to me. The IANA functions are being transferred to some set of actors in the Internet community; our job is to ensure that the proposal makes those actors accountable to the global MS community (whatever that is) but not to transfer them to the global MS comm as such. Thus, I prefer "Internet community" to "global MS community." Further, "global MS community" is a mouthful and a bit of jargon to an ordinary person; let's just say what we mean.
I do agree that the final proposal we submit should include dissenting views. But given that our job is to assist in and compile an executable proposal it makes no sense to include any and all proposals that were either not workable nor not supported.
-----Original Message----- From: ianatransition-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ianatransition-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hill Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:30 AM To: Ianaxfer@Elists. Isoc. Org; Ianatransition@Icann. Org; ICANN Internal Cc: Rhill@Alum. Mit. Edu Subject: [ianatransition] Comments on Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group
Please find attached my comments on the Draft charter for the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group and some proposed revisions.
Best, Richard Hill _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Hi Joe, all, I think this is a very good addition and would support amending the current text to include this. Thank you Joe for all your effort here. Best regards, Lynn On Jul 23, 2014, at 6:20 AM, Joseph Alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> wrote:
We could add the following to address those concerns:
Chair may call for additional volunteers to support the work of the chair, including requesting the ICG to more formally seek volunteers for vice chair positions which the group shall designate related to specific work , should the amount of work prove problematic to manage for the Chair and Alternate.
Joe On 7/23/2014 5:37 AM, Narelle Clark wrote:
Looks like an effective plan to me. I remain concerned that this is too much effort for a pair, and would be happy with a second ‘alternate’. Since I’m not offering to be either at this stage, I am not too concerned either way, but will monitor and lend an ear should the designated parties start to feel the load.
A couple of typos found, amended and below in the attached and one minor clarification.
[When do we use cloud file sharing for this?]
regards
Narelle
From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff Sent: Wednesday, 23 July 2014 7:22 PM To: ICANN Internal Subject: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
Colleagues:
As a result of the consultation process, a new consensus has emerged:
There is now support for a Chair and Alternate. I have taken the liberty off accommodating a minority request for co-chairs by allowing the Chair to have the Alternate play a supporting role to share the work as they see fit between themselves, but the Chair is the primary decision-maker between the two.
I have adapted the previous document to reflect that. Attached is a red line version, below is a clean text.
In the process of comment Alissa Cooper has been the only candidate for Chair spontaneously suggested. There is a request of the existing volunteers or any new volunteers to clarify their position related to what role they are interested in; please note the timeline below.
One question as to process. Online, the only humming comes from the air conditioning; therefore the process of achieving consensus is the rough consensus among those who post an opinion. To date the above reflects the consensus comments.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Role Of The Chair-Alternate (Draft v 1.0)
[Amended – NC]
Introduction
As a result of the consultation since the first meeting of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) a new consensus has emerged among those that have commented. There will be one Chair and an Alternate.. A call for volunteers remains open among committee members for Chair and Alternate. It continues to be agreed that the roles of the Chair/Alternate, supported by the secretariat, would be mostly related to the organization and running of the coordination group – keeping the trains running on time was a description often used by analogy. The ability of Chair/Alternate to execute the needed functions and work collaboratively was seen as essential to the role. It was also suggested by some that considerations of diversity would be desirable in the choice of officers. Finally it was suggested that a more precise resume of the roles would be useful, which is the purpose of this draft.
Comment and Selection Process
This Draft, Chair-Alternate (draft 1.0) has incorporated the requested changes from commentators, with one compromise – there was a minority request for more than one chair to share the work. I have proposed that the Chair and Alternate can self-organize the work between themselves. This maintains one clear Chair, while allowing for the Alternate to support the chair as well.
The final deadline for comments and additional volunteers by 2:00PM CET Thursday July 24th to the list under the subject “Role of the Chair-Alternate draft v 1.0 for comment and volunteers”. The Role of the Chair-Alternate document and list of volunteers will be posted on Thursday evening. ICG members must make their preferences for Chair and Alternate known one week from that date (COB July 31). If ICG members are in agreement (please suggest alternative procedures to the list, if not), preferences can be manifested by sending a post to the list with your preferred candidate for each role.. We would ask that all volunteers be sure to have submitted their bios to the secretariat as requested so that they are available for review. Any volunteer wishing to provide further information may do so by e-mail to the list. To date, there have been 5 volunteers:
Russ Housley (IAB) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Partrik Faltstrom (SSAC) Keith Drazek (GTLd Registries) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC)
Since the consultation, a majority of the commentators, including some of the other volunteers, have supported Alissa Cooper to be Chair (the only person mentioned to date for the revised role), citing her exemplary work in preparing for and executing the de-facto chair role of the first meeting. Alissa has indicated her willingness to serve if that is the will of the group. Furthermore, there have been no suggestions for modification to the role description.
In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions? Obviously, Alissa has been nominated for Chair and accepted, if so confirmed, so that is clarified as to her intent.
Chair/Alternate Processes and Responsibilities:
Operational Processes
· There will be a Chair and an Alternate (selected from volunteers) that will serve for the duration of this exercise. The Alternate will be able to act as chair if the Chair is unavailable and will also be able to support the Chair in related activities as needed. · The ICG will reserve the right to change the number of the Chair/Alternate, their role or who will serve, as appropriate, through its established operating procedure of rough consensus. · If for any reason the Chair or Alternate is no longer able or willing to serve in that capacity, they will inform the secretariat who will communicate this to the ICG and request that it seek volunteers to fill the vacancy.. · The Chair and Alternate are explicitly able to participate in ICG discussions on their own or their constituency’s behalf and are just requested to take appropriate precaution that there is no confusion related to their role in such participation. · The operational modalities of the Chair and Alternate, who is undertaking what function, moderating the conversation for example, maintaining the queue…, is left to the Chair’s self-organization. It was the view of the ICG that we did not wish to micro-manage the Chair operations, but ICG obviously reserves the right to suggest or make changes pursuant to rough consensus.
Responsibilities:
· The role of the Chair/Alternate is to assure that meetings and conference calls are properly scheduled, planned, prepared, organized and efficiently conducted including: o finalizing this version of the timeline and other work in process o planning for appropriate outreach and consultation for the ICG as a whole o timely developing agendas in appropriate consultation with ICG, o organizing volunteers (for themes, discussion topics and other needed functions) o moderating discussion and other elements of meeting function o overseeing minutes and summaries being taken, reviewed and circulated in a timely fashion supported by the secretariat as well as the drafting, circulation and publication of other needed papers and documents, and o assuring that action items are captured, completed or otherwise followed up; including between calls and meetings. · Chair/Alternate will be appropriately supported by the Secretariat in the executing these functions. · Chair/Alternate are not meant to have independent decision-making in substantive issues of the ICG on behalf of the group, but are rather the coordinators of the process elements related to the calls, meetings and related functions. Decisions must remain inclusive and collaborative. There was discussion, however, that where rough consensus does not emerge organically or cannot be recognized, the Chair/Alternate will lead the ICG in a process to finalize rough consensus. · There is no current spokesperson or press liaison role associated to the Chair/Alternate, but the ICG may revisit that function as needed and subject to whatever conditions (only speak from agreed points, etc) it feels appropriate. · Chair/Alternate should also recognize that by virtue of their title they are clothed with apparent authority and should make clear across all situations what their role and representative capacity is (on behalf of themselves, their constituency, drawing from agreed positions…) · Chair/Alternate need to be mindful of and support the needs of transparency of this process in the planning, organization, conduct and reporting back of calls and meetings as well as the drafting of papers and other supporting documents
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Agreed, thanks all. Like Narelle I’m a little concerned about the amount of work, also that some looks purely administrative. Good secretariat support will be critical, and I suggest the Chair/s delegate some of these responsibilities entirely to the Sec, as they see fit. I don’t think we need to work all the detail in advance, just be flexible as time goes on. So, I’m in favour of accepting this, and moving on. Paul. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg@apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 See you at APNIC 38! http://conference.apnic.net/38 On 23 Jul 2014, at 7:37 pm, Narelle Clark <narelle.clark@accan.org.au> wrote:
Looks like an effective plan to me. I remain concerned that this is too much effort for a pair, and would be happy with a second ‘alternate’. Since I’m not offering to be either at this stage, I am not too concerned either way, but will monitor and lend an ear should the designated parties start to feel the load.
A couple of typos found, amended and below in the attached and one minor clarification.
[When do we use cloud file sharing for this?]
regards
Narelle
From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff Sent: Wednesday, 23 July 2014 7:22 PM To: ICANN Internal Subject: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
Colleagues:
As a result of the consultation process, a new consensus has emerged:
There is now support for a Chair and Alternate. I have taken the liberty off accommodating a minority request for co-chairs by allowing the Chair to have the Alternate play a supporting role to share the work as they see fit between themselves, but the Chair is the primary decision-maker between the two.
I have adapted the previous document to reflect that. Attached is a red line version, below is a clean text.
In the process of comment Alissa Cooper has been the only candidate for Chair spontaneously suggested. There is a request of the existing volunteers or any new volunteers to clarify their position related to what role they are interested in; please note the timeline below.
One question as to process. Online, the only humming comes from the air conditioning; therefore the process of achieving consensus is the rough consensus among those who post an opinion. To date the above reflects the consensus comments.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Role Of The Chair-Alternate (Draft v 1.0)
[Amended – NC]
Introduction
As a result of the consultation since the first meeting of the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) a new consensus has emerged among those that have commented. There will be one Chair and an Alternate.. A call for volunteers remains open among committee members for Chair and Alternate. It continues to be agreed that the roles of the Chair/Alternate, supported by the secretariat, would be mostly related to the organization and running of the coordination group – keeping the trains running on time was a description often used by analogy. The ability of Chair/Alternate to execute the needed functions and work collaboratively was seen as essential to the role. It was also suggested by some that considerations of diversity would be desirable in the choice of officers. Finally it was suggested that a more precise resume of the roles would be useful, which is the purpose of this draft.
Comment and Selection Process
This Draft, Chair-Alternate (draft 1.0) has incorporated the requested changes from commentators, with one compromise – there was a minority request for more than one chair to share the work. I have proposed that the Chair and Alternate can self-organize the work between themselves. This maintains one clear Chair, while allowing for the Alternate to support the chair as well.
The final deadline for comments and additional volunteers by 2:00PM CET Thursday July 24th to the list under the subject “Role of the Chair-Alternate draft v 1.0 for comment and volunteers”. The Role of the Chair-Alternate document and list of volunteers will be posted on Thursday evening. ICG members must make their preferences for Chair and Alternate known one week from that date (COB July 31). If ICG members are in agreement (please suggest alternative procedures to the list, if not), preferences can be manifested by sending a post to the list with your preferred candidate for each role.. We would ask that all volunteers be sure to have submitted their bios to the secretariat as requested so that they are available for review. Any volunteer wishing to provide further information may do so by e-mail to the list. To date, there have been 5 volunteers:
Russ Housley (IAB) Alissa Cooper (IETF) Partrik Faltstrom (SSAC) Keith Drazek (GTLd Registries) Jean-Jacques Subrenat (ALAC)
Since the consultation, a majority of the commentators, including some of the other volunteers, have supported Alissa Cooper to be Chair (the only person mentioned to date for the revised role), citing her exemplary work in preparing for and executing the de-facto chair role of the first meeting. Alissa has indicated her willingness to serve if that is the will of the group. Furthermore, there have been no suggestions for modification to the role description.
In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions? Obviously, Alissa has been nominated for Chair and accepted, if so confirmed, so that is clarified as to her intent.
Chair/Alternate Processes and Responsibilities:
Operational Processes
· There will be a Chair and an Alternate (selected from volunteers) that will serve for the duration of this exercise. The Alternate will be able to act as chair if the Chair is unavailable and will also be able to support the Chair in related activities as needed. · The ICG will reserve the right to change the number of the Chair/Alternate, their role or who will serve, as appropriate, through its established operating procedure of rough consensus. · If for any reason the Chair or Alternate is no longer able or willing to serve in that capacity, they will inform the secretariat who will communicate this to the ICG and request that it seek volunteers to fill the vacancy.. · The Chair and Alternate are explicitly able to participate in ICG discussions on their own or their constituency’s behalf and are just requested to take appropriate precaution that there is no confusion related to their role in such participation. · The operational modalities of the Chair and Alternate, who is undertaking what function, moderating the conversation for example, maintaining the queue…, is left to the Chair’s self-organization. It was the view of the ICG that we did not wish to micro-manage the Chair operations, but ICG obviously reserves the right to suggest or make changes pursuant to rough consensus.
Responsibilities:
· The role of the Chair/Alternate is to assure that meetings and conference calls are properly scheduled, planned, prepared, organized and efficiently conducted including: o finalizing this version of the timeline and other work in process o planning for appropriate outreach and consultation for the ICG as a whole o timely developing agendas in appropriate consultation with ICG, o organizing volunteers (for themes, discussion topics and other needed functions) o moderating discussion and other elements of meeting function o overseeing minutes and summaries being taken, reviewed and circulated in a timely fashion supported by the secretariat as well as the drafting, circulation and publication of other needed papers and documents, and o assuring that action items are captured, completed or otherwise followed up; including between calls and meetings. · Chair/Alternate will be appropriately supported by the Secretariat in the executing these functions. · Chair/Alternate are not meant to have independent decision-making in substantive issues of the ICG on behalf of the group, but are rather the coordinators of the process elements related to the calls, meetings and related functions. Decisions must remain inclusive and collaborative. There was discussion, however, that where rough consensus does not emerge organically or cannot be recognized, the Chair/Alternate will lead the ICG in a process to finalize rough consensus. · There is no current spokesperson or press liaison role associated to the Chair/Alternate, but the ICG may revisit that function as needed and subject to whatever conditions (only speak from agreed points, etc) it feels appropriate. · Chair/Alternate should also recognize that by virtue of their title they are clothed with apparent authority and should make clear across all situations what their role and representative capacity is (on behalf of themselves, their constituency, drawing from agreed positions…) · Chair/Alternate need to be mindful of and support the needs of transparency of this process in the planning, organization, conduct and reporting back of calls and meetings as well as the drafting of papers and other supporting documents
<Role Of The Chair-Alternate (draft v 1 0)-NCedits.doc>_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
I am also (still) available for Alternate. I'd support Patrick as well. Regards, Keith -----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Patrik Fältström Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:18 AM To: joseph alhadeff Cc: ICANN Internal Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 On 23 Jul 2014, at 11:22, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> wrote:
In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions?
I am (still) available for Alternate. Patrik
I sent this earlier but didn't see it come through on the list. Apologies if this is a repeat. I am also (still) available for Alternate. I'd support Patrick as well. Regards, Keith Begin forwarded message: From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: July 23, 2014, 12:14:16 PM EDT To: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se<mailto:paf@frobbit.se>>, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com<mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com>> Cc: ICANN Internal <internal-cg@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 I am also (still) available for Alternate. I'd support Patrick as well. Regards, Keith -----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Patrik Fältström Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:18 AM To: joseph alhadeff Cc: ICANN Internal Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 On 23 Jul 2014, at 11:22, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com<mailto:joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com>> wrote: In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions? I am (still) available for Alternate. Patrik “This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately.”
Colleagues - as we March to Noon UTC, I wanted to provide and update on volunteers and one more look at the proposed final paper (attached for your reference). To date the following information exists on our volunteers and their positions of interest: AlissaCooper -- Chair Keith Drazek -- Alternate Patrik Faltstrom -- Alternate Russ Housley -- reconfirmed interest, but position not specified Jean-Jacques Subrenat -- has not reconfirmed. Best, Joe
Hello Joe, the reason I have not "reconfirmed" is that, as a representative of the ALAC, I cannot agree to the fact that the decision taken in London (3 Co-Chairs) has been modified in several iterations (one Chair, one Chair + Alternate(s), Chair and sub-Chairs...) without full consensus. There is no point in replying to a subsidiary question, such as my candidacy, before questions of principle have been properly dealt with (as things stand today, heavy representation of one citizenship and of business -in various guises- in the Coordination Group, content of our current draft Charter, the "technical" nature of the exercise to be dealt with only or chiefly by the "technical" and business entities, image that an unbalanced Group would give to the global Internet community, the risk that this may contribute to a misrepresentation of the true motivation of the USG, etc). Because of their non-anecdotal nature, I have referred these points to the ALAC, and am awaiting instructions. Best regards, Jean-Jacques. ----- Mail original ----- De: "joseph alhadeff" <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> À: internal-cg@icann.org Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Juillet 2014 13:51:22 Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Fwd: Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 Colleagues - as we March to Noon UTC, I wanted to provide and update on volunteers and one more look at the proposed final paper (attached for your reference). To date the following information exists on our volunteers and their positions of interest: Alissa Cooper – Chair Keith Drazek – Alternate Patrik Faltstrom – Alternate Russ Housley – reconfirmed interest, but position not specified Jean-Jacques Subrenat – has not reconfirmed. Best, Joe _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Jean-Jacques, Colleagues: We will need to come to operating agreements related to online process. Specific dates were set for comment. Proposals were made for the change and seconded by the only people who bothered to comment. Requests of reaction to the proposal were made which generated no reply beyond similar reaffirmation. What is our online consensus process if not taking into account comments made? If those who do not agree don't comment I'm not sure how that is to be intuited or factored. There is no humming or "thumbs up" online and I cautioned that silence would be interpreted s assent and still no comments. This needs to be an active and participative group. How would you propose achieving consensus on new proposals/amendments? Joe On 7/24/2014 9:54 AM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote:
Hello Joe,
the reason I have not "reconfirmed" is that, as a representative of the ALAC, I cannot agree to the fact that the decision taken in London (3 Co-Chairs) has been modified in several iterations (one Chair, one Chair + Alternate(s), Chair and sub-Chairs...) without full consensus. There is no point in replying to a subsidiary question, such as my candidacy, before questions of principle have been properly dealt with (as things stand today, heavy representation of one citizenship and of business -in various guises- in the Coordination Group, content of our current draft Charter, the "technical" nature of the exercise to be dealt with only or chiefly by the "technical" and business entities, image that an unbalanced Group would give to the global Internet community, the risk that this may contribute to a misrepresentation of the true motivation of the USG, etc).
Because of their non-anecdotal nature, I have referred these points to the ALAC, and am awaiting instructions.
Best regards, Jean-Jacques.
----- Mail original ----- De: "joseph alhadeff" <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> À: internal-cg@icann.org Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Juillet 2014 13:51:22 Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Fwd: Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
Colleagues - as we March to Noon UTC, I wanted to provide and update on volunteers and one more look at the proposed final paper (attached for your reference).
To date the following information exists on our volunteers and their positions of interest:
Alissa Cooper – Chair
Keith Drazek – Alternate
Patrik Faltstrom – Alternate
Russ Housley – reconfirmed interest, but position not specified
Jean-Jacques Subrenat – has not reconfirmed.
Best,
Joe
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
Hi all, I share the concern of Jean-Jacques about the constitution of the group of chairs, and the need for diversity (which I spoke to during the meeting). Sorry if I also missed the opportunity to respond while the discussion was underway (due to travel) but I think this is important and we should take the time necessary to gain a fuller consensus on these questions. Paul. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg@apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 See you at APNIC 38! http://conference.apnic.net/38 On 25 Jul 2014, at 12:15 am, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> wrote:
Jean-Jacques, Colleagues:
We will need to come to operating agreements related to online process. Specific dates were set for comment. Proposals were made for the change and seconded by the only people who bothered to comment. Requests of reaction to the proposal were made which generated no reply beyond similar reaffirmation. What is our online consensus process if not taking into account comments made? If those who do not agree don't comment I'm not sure how that is to be intuited or factored. There is no humming or "thumbs up" online and I cautioned that silence would be interpreted s assent and still no comments. This needs to be an active and participative group. How would you propose achieving consensus on new proposals/amendments?
Joe On 7/24/2014 9:54 AM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote:
Hello Joe,
the reason I have not "reconfirmed" is that, as a representative of the ALAC, I cannot agree to the fact that the decision taken in London (3 Co-Chairs) has been modified in several iterations (one Chair, one Chair + Alternate(s), Chair and sub-Chairs...) without full consensus. There is no point in replying to a subsidiary question, such as my candidacy, before questions of principle have been properly dealt with (as things stand today, heavy representation of one citizenship and of business -in various guises- in the Coordination Group, content of our current draft Charter, the "technical" nature of the exercise to be dealt with only or chiefly by the "technical" and business entities, image that an unbalanced Group would give to the global Internet community, the risk that this may contribute to a misrepresentation of the true motivation of the USG, etc).
Because of their non-anecdotal nature, I have referred these points to the ALAC, and am awaiting instructions.
Best regards, Jean-Jacques.
----- Mail original ----- De: "joseph alhadeff" <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> À: internal-cg@icann.org Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Juillet 2014 13:51:22 Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Fwd: Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
Colleagues - as we March to Noon UTC, I wanted to provide and update on volunteers and one more look at the proposed final paper (attached for your reference).
To date the following information exists on our volunteers and their positions of interest:
Alissa Cooper – Chair
Keith Drazek – Alternate
Patrik Faltstrom – Alternate
Russ Housley – reconfirmed interest, but position not specified
Jean-Jacques Subrenat – has not reconfirmed.
Best,
Joe
_______________________________________________ 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
I also share Jean-Jacques concern about reversal of a clear consensus from the meeting. I don't attribute any real problems or motives to this, I just think we need to be careful making declarations about a "new" consensus that suddenly overrules or changes a clear and formal consensus that was reached with almost everyone in the room - which this "new" consensus is based on essentially two email messages on this list. Again, don't want to come across as suspicious or negative, but let's just avoid falling into rather obvious pitfalls that can become problematic or troublesome when the stakes are much higher. -----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul Wilson Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 10:36 PM To: joseph alhadeff Cc: internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0 Hi all, I share the concern of Jean-Jacques about the constitution of the group of chairs, and the need for diversity (which I spoke to during the meeting). Sorry if I also missed the opportunity to respond while the discussion was underway (due to travel) but I think this is important and we should take the time necessary to gain a fuller consensus on these questions. Paul. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg@apnic.net> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 See you at APNIC 38! http://conference.apnic.net/38 On 25 Jul 2014, at 12:15 am, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> wrote:
Jean-Jacques, Colleagues:
We will need to come to operating agreements related to online process. Specific dates were set for comment. Proposals were made for the change and seconded by the only people who bothered to comment. Requests of reaction to the proposal were made which generated no reply beyond similar reaffirmation. What is our online consensus process if not taking into account comments made? If those who do not agree don't comment I'm not sure how that is to be intuited or factored. There is no humming or "thumbs up" online and I cautioned that silence would be interpreted s assent and still no comments. This needs to be an active and participative group. How would you propose achieving consensus on new proposals/amendments?
Joe On 7/24/2014 9:54 AM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote:
Hello Joe,
the reason I have not "reconfirmed" is that, as a representative of the ALAC, I cannot agree to the fact that the decision taken in London (3 Co-Chairs) has been modified in several iterations (one Chair, one Chair + Alternate(s), Chair and sub-Chairs...) without full consensus. There is no point in replying to a subsidiary question, such as my candidacy, before questions of principle have been properly dealt with (as things stand today, heavy representation of one citizenship and of business -in various guises- in the Coordination Group, content of our current draft Charter, the "technical" nature of the exercise to be dealt with only or chiefly by the "technical" and business entities, image that an unbalanced Group would give to the global Internet community, the risk that this may contribute to a misrepresentation of the true motivation of the USG, etc).
Because of their non-anecdotal nature, I have referred these points to the ALAC, and am awaiting instructions.
Best regards, Jean-Jacques.
----- Mail original ----- De: "joseph alhadeff" <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> À: internal-cg@icann.org Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Juillet 2014 13:51:22 Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Fwd: Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
Colleagues - as we March to Noon UTC, I wanted to provide and update on volunteers and one more look at the proposed final paper (attached for your reference).
To date the following information exists on our volunteers and their positions of interest:
Alissa Cooper - Chair
Keith Drazek - Alternate
Patrik Faltstrom - Alternate
Russ Housley - reconfirmed interest, but position not specified
Jean-Jacques Subrenat - has not reconfirmed.
Best,
Joe
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
I support Keith as Alternate Kuo Wu Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> 於 2014/7/24 0:14 寫道：
I am also (still) available for Alternate.
I'd support Patrick as well.
Regards, Keith
-----Original Message----- From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Patrik Fältström Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:18 AM To: joseph alhadeff Cc: ICANN Internal Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Co-chairs revised draft 2.0
On 23 Jul 2014, at 11:22, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> wrote:
In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions?
I am (still) available for Alternate.
Patrik
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
I support Patrik as an Alternate chair. Kuo Wu Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> 於 2014/7/23 18:18 寫道：
On 23 Jul 2014, at 11:22, joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff@oracle.com> wrote:
In light of the above, would the current volunteers please specify if they continue to be interested in one or both positions?
I am (still) available for Alternate.
Patrik
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
participants (12)
-
Drazek, Keith -
Ergys Ramaj -
joseph alhadeff -
Lynn St.Amour -
Milton L Mueller -
Narelle Clark -
Patrik Fältström -
Paul Wilson -
Richard Hill -
Russ Housley -
Subrenat, Jean-Jacques -
Wu Kuo-Wei