[CWG-DT-Stewardship] Proposed Agenda and latest version of charter for review

Tue Aug 12 01:21:29 UTC 2014

Thanks Chuck. I also like this wording.

all the best,

León

> El 11/08/2014, a las 10:03, Allan MacGillivray <allan.macgillivray at cira.ca> escribió:
> 
> I am also comfortable with this wording.  Thanks Chuck.
>  
> From: Julie Hammer [mailto:julie.hammer at bigpond.com] 
> Sent: August-11-14 11:03 AM
> To: Gomes, Chuck
> Cc: Allan MacGillivray; CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Proposed Agenda and latest version of charter for review
>  
> Hi Chuck,
>  
> I think this is better wording and am happy with this.  Many thanks.
>  
> Cheers,  Julie
>  
> On 12 Aug 2014, at 12:53 am, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com> wrote:
>  
> Thanks Allan.  Now I know what the intent was.  Would the following work:  “That proposal may include alternativeoptions for specific features within it, provided that each option carries comparable support from the CWG. ”
>  
> Chuck
>  
> From: Allan MacGillivray [mailto:allan.macgillivray at cira.ca] 
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 10:44 AM
> To: Gomes, Chuck; Julie Hammer; CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
> Subject: RE: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Proposed Agenda and latest version of charter for review
>  
> Chuck – I worked on this with Julie.  The objective here was to give the CWG the flexibility of providing more than one option, but not the flexibility to provide dissenting opinions, that is options on which there is no consensus e.g. ‘we are happy with any of these options because we have achieved the same level of consensus on all of them’.
>  
> Allan
>  
> From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
> Sent: August-11-14 10:40 AM
> To: Julie Hammer; CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Proposed Agenda and latest version of charter for review
> Importance: High
>  
> Thanks Julie.  The second sentence isn’t clear to me.  If I had to explain what it means to others, I don’t think I could do that.  Can you possibly tweak it some?  What do you mean by ‘specific features’?  What kind of features?  Maybe some examples would help.  Also, what does ‘the same level of consensus’ mean?  Same level of consensus as what?  Do you simply mean ‘each option has consensus support of the group’?
>  
> Chuck
>  
> From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hammer
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 10:09 AM
> To: CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Proposed Agenda and latest version of charter for review
>  
> Hi Everyone,
>  
> I propose that the first sentence in the section titled 'Goals and Objectives' be amended to read:
>  
> The primary goal of the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal (CWG) will be to produce a consolidated transition proposal for the elements of the IANA Functions relating to the Domain Name System.  That proposal may include options for specific features within it, provided that each option carries the same level of consensus from the CWG. 
>  
> Cheers,  Julie
>  
> On 11 Aug 2014, at 6:44 pm, Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com> wrote:
>  
> Thanks Marika and CWG Colleagues,
>  
> The agenda below is the one I expect we will now follow.
>  
> As proposed a little over a week ago and also below, I think the realistic way to work through the charter in the time allocated for the call is to seek objections to / concerns with the current wording.
> To the extent that members are OK with the wording, we’ll take that as read.
>  
> Many thanks to those who have contributed to getting this in such good shape over a relatively short time,
>  
> Talk with you all at 13h00 UTC.
>  
> Jonathan
>  
>  
> From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
> Sent: 08 August 2014 12:22
> To: CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
> Subject: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Proposed Agenda and latest version of charter for review
>  
> Dear All,
>  
> Please find below the proposed agenda for Monday's DT meeting, subject to revisions by the co-chairs and input from the DT. Having discussed this with Jonathan, we would like to encourage you to identify any other items beyond those listed in agenda item 2 that in your view need to be further discussed by the DT – we will operate under the assumption that apart from those items already identified and additional items that may get flagged prior to the meeting, the current language / proposed edits as in the latest version of the charter as attached are acceptable by all and do not need further discussion. 
>  
> Please note that in the attached version (based on the version that Julie sent earlier today), I've added some proposed wording to the 'additional resources required' section to highlight that this is something the CWG should preferably focus on at an early stage as it is unlikely that the DT at this point in time will be in a position to identify what additional resources the CWG may need. 
>  
> If you have any comments and/or questions, please share those with the list.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Marika
>  
> Proposed Agenda – DT Meeting – Monday 11 August at 13.00 UTC
> Welcome & roll call
> Draft Charter - Review open items (membership, no consensus, additional resources – DT members to identify which other sections / items need further review ahead of the meeting)
> Confirm deadline for final edits / comments with aim to have DT Chairs submit charter to all SO/ACs by 14 August at the latest for consideration
> Any next steps for the DT while SO/ACs consider the charter for approval?
> AOB
> Closure
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-DT-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-dt-stewardship
>  
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-DT-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-dt-stewardship

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-dt-stewardship/attachments/20140811/9857a69a/attachment-0001.html>