I think that this is helpful.. Please include ICC-BASIS in other interested parties... On 9/15/2014 7:24 AM, Manal Ismail wrote:

Oops .. Now with the attachment ..

Kind Regards

--Manal

*From:*internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Manal Ismail *Sent:* Monday, September 15, 2014 1:20 PM *To:* ICG *Subject:* [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal..

Dear All ..

In light of our discussions, Michael has developed the attached flow chart for the foreseen process that is to be followed in assembling a unified consensus proposal .. Seeking feedback from Jandyr and myself, we all thought it would be more practical to seek ICG members' feedback and make sure the chart reflects a common understanding, before using it in any outreach activities ..

Furthermore, if ICG members feel it's useful and agree to its content, I think it may be helpful if we have it uploaded to the Dropbox, with Michael's permission ..

Kind Regards

--Manal

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

I am fine with that, but we should not cherry pick among members of the ICG... On 9/15/2014 9:58 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

Before we get into a game of listing dozens of specific organizations, I would suggest broader categories, such as "users" or "commercial and noncommercial users" etc. I don't think it's appropriate to include the name of specific trade associations in that list.

--MM

*From:*internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *joseph alhadeff

I think that this is helpful.. Please include ICC-BASIS in other interested parties...

Perhaps we list the main stakeholder community groups (Gov, business, civil society, technical and academic...) and the ICG members orgs as examples of representative types of organizations of the category? Joe On 9/15/2014 11:23 AM, Manal Ismail wrote:

I see your points ..

I think it first started by the chartering organizations of the cross community working group, then (trying to find a venue for GAC input) adding the GAC, then gathering all into a bigger shape representing 'Other interested parties' to make sure it covers all who are interested .. Personally I'm flexible for any more accurate, representative and inclusive way of reflecting this ..

Kind Regards

--Manal

*From:*internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *joseph alhadeff *Sent:* Monday, September 15, 2014 5:01 PM *To:* Milton L Mueller; internal-cg@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensusproposal..

I am fine with that, but we should not cherry pick among members of the ICG...

On 9/15/2014 9:58 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

Before we get into a game of listing dozens of specific organizations, I would suggest broader categories, such as "users" or "commercial and noncommercial users" etc. I don't think it's appropriate to include the name of specific trade associations in that list.

--MM

*From:*internal-cg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *joseph alhadeff

I think that this is helpful.. Please include ICC-BASIS in other interested parties...

I love the diagram. Sets things out cleanly. I agree it is pointless to name all the interested parties, but rather use a more generic term if possible. Of course, if ICC-BASIS gets included then ISOC will have to be also... :) My only additional comment is that if possible, surely the NTIA could start having a think, and making comments from Step 6? Hadn't we considered that previously? Narelle From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller Sent: Monday, 15 September 2014 11:58 PM To: 'joseph alhadeff'; internal-cg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Before we get into a game of listing dozens of specific organizations, I would suggest broader categories, such as "users" or "commercial and noncommercial users" etc. I don't think it's appropriate to include the name of specific trade associations in that list. --MM From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff I think that this is helpful.. Please include ICC-BASIS in other interested parties...

Mary, all thanks should go to Michael .. The testing step is already there, a little bit below, as a parallel step .. Does this address your point? Kind Regards --Manal From: Mary Uduma [mailto:mnuduma@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 4:44 PM To: Manal Ismail; ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Thank you Manal. This is very helpful. May be you consider inclusion of a small note to testing as you did to other mile stone dates. Mary Uduma On Monday, September 15, 2014 11:27 AM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote: Oops .. Now with the attachment .. Kind Regards --Manal From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Manal Ismail Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 1:20 PM To: ICG Subject: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Dear All .. In light of our discussions, Michael has developed the attached flow chart for the foreseen process that is to be followed in assembling a unified consensus proposal .. Seeking feedback from Jandyr and myself, we all thought it would be more practical to seek ICG members' feedback and make sure the chart reflects a common understanding, before using it in any outreach activities .. Furthermore, if ICG members feel it's useful and agree to its content, I think it may be helpful if we have it uploaded to the Dropbox, with Michael's permission .. Kind Regards --Manal _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

Many thanks Mary .. Whether the chart goes public or not is up to the ICG members .. What I recall from our meeting in Istanbul is that the testing should cover the unified assembled proposal which is basically an integration of all what will be submitted by the operational communities, except for the root zone part which will still be functioning as it is today .. Is this the explanation you mean or the 'nature' you are referring to? Apologies for my bad memory but I don't recall the details and whether or not we have agreed on "Whose responsibility is it to test", and whether it is going to be one overall test or separate tests one for each operational community? Kind Regards --Manal From: Mary Uduma [mailto:mnuduma@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 2:06 PM To: Manal Ismail; ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Thank you Manal, I was thinking of the same note as included in the prose version, (Q: Whose responsibility is it to test and what is the nature?). I can see that the other timelines are clearly stated as to who does what in the chart. Perhaps, we can ignore if the chart is not going public, since ICG members do understand step 4 as explained during the meeting in Istanbul on the 6th of September 2014. Mary On Monday, September 15, 2014 3:08 PM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote: Mary, all thanks should go to Michael .. The testing step is already there, a little bit below, as a parallel step .. Does this address your point? Kind Regards --Manal From: Mary Uduma [mailto:mnuduma@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 4:44 PM To: Manal Ismail; ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Thank you Manal. This is very helpful. May be you consider inclusion of a small note to testing as you did to other mile stone dates. Mary Uduma On Monday, September 15, 2014 11:27 AM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg> wrote: Oops .. Now with the attachment .. Kind Regards --Manal From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Manal Ismail Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 1:20 PM To: ICG Subject: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Dear All .. In light of our discussions, Michael has developed the attached flow chart for the foreseen process that is to be followed in assembling a unified consensus proposal .. Seeking feedback from Jandyr and myself, we all thought it would be more practical to seek ICG members' feedback and make sure the chart reflects a common understanding, before using it in any outreach activities .. Furthermore, if ICG members feel it's useful and agree to its content, I think it may be helpful if we have it uploaded to the Dropbox, with Michael's permission .. Kind Regards --Manal _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg

Manal re: "Whose responsibility is it to test", and whether it is going to be one overall test or separate tests one for each operational community? I had suggested a block where 'devise test plan' occurred. It's a bit difficult to test something that isn't even formed. Is it a set of process tests? Input/output tests? Statistical tests? Etc These are the sorts of things that can be determined in the phase before testing, once a sense of the proposal is formed. Narelle From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Manal Ismail Sent: Wednesday, 17 September 2014 4:49 PM To: Mary Uduma; ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Many thanks Mary .. Whether the chart goes public or not is up to the ICG members .. What I recall from our meeting in Istanbul is that the testing should cover the unified assembled proposal which is basically an integration of all what will be submitted by the operational communities, except for the root zone part which will still be functioning as it is today .. Is this the explanation you mean or the 'nature' you are referring to? Apologies for my bad memory but I don't recall the details and whether or not we have agreed on "Whose responsibility is it to test", and whether it is going to be one overall test or separate tests one for each operational community? Kind Regards --Manal From: Mary Uduma [mailto:mnuduma@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 2:06 PM To: Manal Ismail; ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Thank you Manal, I was thinking of the same note as included in the prose version, (Q: Whose responsibility is it to test and what is the nature?). I can see that the other timelines are clearly stated as to who does what in the chart. Perhaps, we can ignore if the chart is not going public, since ICG members do understand step 4 as explained during the meeting in Istanbul on the 6th of September 2014. Mary On Monday, September 15, 2014 3:08 PM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg<mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg>> wrote: Mary, all thanks should go to Michael .. The testing step is already there, a little bit below, as a parallel step .. Does this address your point? Kind Regards --Manal From: Mary Uduma [mailto:mnuduma@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 4:44 PM To: Manal Ismail; ICG Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Thank you Manal. This is very helpful. May be you consider inclusion of a small note to testing as you did to other mile stone dates. Mary Uduma On Monday, September 15, 2014 11:27 AM, Manal Ismail <manal@tra.gov.eg<mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg>> wrote: Oops .. Now with the attachment .. Kind Regards --Manal From: internal-cg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Manal Ismail Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 1:20 PM To: ICG Subject: [Internal-cg] Flow Chart - Assembling a unified consensus proposal.. Dear All .. In light of our discussions, Michael has developed the attached flow chart for the foreseen process that is to be followed in assembling a unified consensus proposal .. Seeking feedback from Jandyr and myself, we all thought it would be more practical to seek ICG members' feedback and make sure the chart reflects a common understanding, before using it in any outreach activities .. Furthermore, if ICG members feel it's useful and agree to its content, I think it may be helpful if we have it uploaded to the Dropbox, with Michael's permission .. Kind Regards --Manal _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org<mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg