[bc-gnso] FW: for expedited review: draft BC comment on registry proposal for Continuity Operations Instrument (COI)

[Steve DelBianco]

Thanks to all for engaging in the email discussion over these comments.

However, I don't think we've seen any specific edits on the draft circulated last Tuesday 22-Nov.

Ron and Phil proposed a more extensive critique of the Guidebook's COI plan, but the scope of this comment is reacting to the Registry proposal for an alternative mechanism (COF).  I would strongly suggest that Ron and Phil individually submit their concerns to ICANN, of course.

Mike Palage advised us to be careful about conflicts of interest, so I propose a simple way to do this quickly and transparently:

If any BC member objects to the BC filing the attached draft comment , please REPLY ALL and indicate your objection and reason.   If any member objections are noted by midnight UTC on 1-Dec, we will extend the process and ask the membership to vote on alternate versions of BC comments.   This would mean our comments are submitted late, but might still be considered.

If no objections are noted we will post the attached draft to ICANN on the closing date of 2-Dec.

Thanks again for engaging in this discussion.

--Steve
(vice chair for policy coordination)


From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at actonline.org<mailto:sdelbianco at actonline.org>>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:04:17 -0500
To: "'bc-GNSO at icann.org<mailto:'bc-GNSO at icann.org> GNSO list'" <bc-gnso at icann.org<mailto:bc-gnso at icann.org>>
Subject: for expedited review: draft BC comment on registry proposal for Continuity Operations Instrument (COI)

Per discussion in Dakar and on our 10-Nov member call, here is a draft of BC comments on the a proposed alternative to the for Continuity Operations Instrument in the new gTLD Program.

Jon Nevett prepared this draft.

This comment period and docs are described here<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/rysg-proposal-cof-17oct11-en.htm>.

These comments are due 2-Dec, giving us 10 days for review and approval.   This is less than the 14-day period required in our charter, so I am requesting an expedited review period.  If any member has substantive objections to the expedited review, we can go to 14 days and submit our comments after the ICANN due date.

All BC members are invited to suggest edits.     Please use track changes and circulate to BC list.

Thanks again to Jon for taking the lead on this.


Steve DelBianco
vice chair for policy coordination, BC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20111130/0d503b5a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: BC on COI proposal [draft 1].doc
Type: application/x-msword
Size: 152064 bytes
Desc: BC on COI proposal [draft 1].doc
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20111130/0d503b5a/BConCOIproposaldraft1.doc>