[CCWG-ACCT] Timeline scenarios - initial draft for comments

Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch
Tue Oct 6 16:32:57 UTC 2015


Dear Kavouss
I feel we should first check with GAC before making such statements
regards
Jorge

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

Am 06.10.2015 um 18:20 schrieb Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>:

Dear All
Remote approval may not be possible for some SOs and ACs certainly almost impossible for  GAC.
Regards
Kavouss

Sent from my iPhone

On 6 Oct 2015, at 15:37, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>> wrote:

Hello Mathieu,

Thanks for the shared timeline. Owning to the ongoing discussion, I can say it seem realistic (if not ambitious). That said, I observed none of the scenarios plans approval of catering organizations with the normal ICANN face 2 face meetings in mind. Does it mean that its been confirmed from all the catering organizations that they could provide their approval(or otherwise) remotely?  I know ALAC may be able to pull that off, but I doubt same will be possible for GAC and ccNSO.

That said, looking at the ICG timeline[1], it seem the CCWG report will be getting to NTIA much later than the ICG combined proposal(assuming ICG timeline is still followed as indicated). Nevertheless, one would expect NTIA to continue her due deligence on the ICG part of the requirement pending the provision of that of the CCWG otherwise it may be good to hear from NTIA whether such delay would significantly delay the transition process in any way.

Regards
1. https://www.ianacg.org/icg-files/documents/TimelineGraphic-v11.pdf

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>> wrote:
Dear colleagues,

The co-chairs had tasked staff to highlight what would be a plausible timeline scenario after our group agrees on a proposed way forward in Dublin.
We investigated a scenario where we would not need a public comment, as a well as a scenario where an extra pûblic comment would be needed.

The attached slides present an initial draft which we submit for comments from the group.

In summary, in the absence of an extra PC period, we could deliver the final report on Nov 20 to the chartering organisations at the earliest. If we need an extra public comment, delivery would be around end of january - beginning of february 2016.

Best regards,
Mathieu

PS: a PDF version will be circulated shortly

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community




--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seun Ojedeji,
Federal University Oye-Ekiti
web:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
Mobile: +2348035233535
alt email: <http://goog_1872880453> seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng<mailto:seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>

Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community



More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list