[Ctn-crosscom] Interim Paper for public comment + overall timeline

Fri Feb 10 10:31:02 UTC 2017

Dear all,
Thank you again for all your comments and the subsequent discussion on the list.
As to the comments received to date:

·        The text as proposed in the Interim paper reflects and summarizes the discussion of the WG up to that point and points of view of respondents to the survey. Some of you may disagree with the text itself, but hence the invitation to use the public forum to provide substantive comments.

·        This document was circulated well before the Hyderabad meeting and agreed membership agreed on the text, with exception of the recommendations. The request on behalf of the chairs was to look at text of the recommendations, specifically whether they reflected the points of view of the members.

Of course, suggestions to correct typos etc. have been taken on-board, without changing the substance

Staff has send the updated version of the Interim Paper to the co-chairs to determine next steps.
As said in previous email the goal is still to publish the Interim Paper as soon as possible (early week 13-17 February).

Kind regards,
Bart

From: <ctn-crosscom-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel at icann.org>
Date: Monday 30 January 2017 at 17:17
To: "alexander at schubert.berlin" <alexander at schubert.berlin>, "ctn-crosscom at icann.org" <ctn-crosscom at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ctn-crosscom] Interim Paper for public comment + overall timeline

Dear Alexander, Timo, Jaap, all,
Thank you for your comments to date. As Emily already indicated in her email, at the direction of the co-chairs staff solicited your substantive comments on the proposed recommendations. As to the substantive comments made on the other parts of the draft: it is my understanding that the W`G agreed that these should be submitted as part of the public comment. In addition, and as always, editorial comments, correction of typo’s etc. are welcome and they will be included in the Interim report.
If you have any (additional) comments on the proposed recommendations, please submit them as soon as possible.

Timeline Public comment interim report
On the latest WG meeting the members agreed that the Interim Paper should be published well before the Copenhagen ICANN meeting to publish the Interim paper well in time for that meeting. To meet that deadline staff proposes to publish the paper by the end of next week, and keep the public comment period open well beyond the Copenhagen ICANN meeting, to allow the community ample of time to discuss and comment on the Interim Paper.

Proposed overall timeline
Once the public comment period is closed, staff needs to summarize comments received, the WG is expected to analyze and review the comments and, if considered reasonable the Interim paper will need to be updated, before submitting the final paper to the chartering organizations for their consideration. Taking these steps into account, the overall timeline will look like:

·         Public comment 9 February – 23 March (49 days)

·         Summary of comments (staff) 24 March – 6 April

·         WG analysis and response 7 April – 28 April

·         Update Interim report taking into account comments received 1 May – 26 May ( 2 meetings)

·         Final paper/ Final report WG 29 may - 9 June 2017

·         Submission Final report to ccNSO and GNSO Councils + publication 12 June 2017
Kind regards,
Bart

-----Original Message-----
From: ctn-crosscom-bounces at icann.org<mailto:ctn-crosscom-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:ctn-crosscom-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Barabas
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 10:26 PM
To: Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap at NLnetLabs.nl<mailto:jaap at NLnetLabs.nl>>
Cc: ctn-crosscom at icann.org<mailto:ctn-crosscom at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ctn-crosscom] [Ext] Re: Interim Paper for public comment

Dear Jaap,

Thank you for your review and feedback. Staff will review the formatting and content of the frames.

Kind regards,

Emily

On 25/01/17 04:48, "Jaap Akkerhuis" <jaap at NLnetLabs.nl<mailto:jaap at NLnetLabs.nl>> wrote:

     Emily Barabas writes:

     > Please find attached a revised version of the CWG-UCTN Interim Paper.

     > This version incorporates language to reflect a lack of consensus on

     > recommendation 3.

     >

     >

     > Kindly provide any final revisions or comments on the Interim Paper by

     > Friday 3 February.

    Dear Emily,

    I did a quick scan and noticed that something went with the two

    "Frames" about the ISO 3166. They now look as a single one to me. But

    apart from that, the first one seemed to have a garbled sentences here

    and there. Note the start of the second section, to quote:

                The ISO body responsible for the standard 3166 is the

                Technical Committee 46, systems etc. and as non-current,

                dependencies, and other areas of particular geopolitical

                interest (ISO/TC 46/WG2).

    And there are more of these.

    I will have a nore close read later, but these things really needs to

    be clean up.

    Regards,

                jaap

_______________________________________________

Ctn-crosscom mailing list

Ctn-crosscom at icann.org<mailto:Ctn-crosscom at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ctn-crosscom

_______________________________________________
Ctn-crosscom mailing list
Ctn-crosscom at icann.org<mailto:Ctn-crosscom at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ctn-crosscom

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ctn-crosscom/attachments/20170210/62cca29e/attachment-0001.html>