[CWG-DT-Stewardship] FW: CWG-ICG meeting at ICANN 51

[Gomes, Chuck]

Is it just me that doesn’t see a lot of value in the ICG open forum on Thursday in L.A. for those who have stayed abreast of the process.  I think it will be very useful for those who haven’t kept up on the details.  I don’t see it though as being a meeting where the real work can start.

In my opinion, the CWG is where the work needs to start and certainly it is fine for some side groups to contribute to this.

For the CWG, I think a process something like the following would be a reasonable and effective way to go:

1.       Describe all the steps in the current IANA processes for names.

2.       Identify the places in those steps where NTIA participates.

3.       Identify elements of NTIA’s role that need to be replaced.

4.       Brainstorm ideas about possible process replacements for NTIA’s role.

5.       Develop consensus positions on a revised process.

6.       Identify process points where accountability checks are needed.

7.       Brainstorm accountability check ideas.

8.       Develop consensus positions on accountability checks.

9.       Brainstorm ideas on how to connect the assurance of general ICANN accountability before the IANA transition happens.

10.   Develop consensus positions regarding 9.

11.   Write final report and deliver it to the ICG.

Of course there should be lots of interaction with the communities CWG members and observers represent as well as the general Internet population throughout the process.  That should be continuous using the representative structure of the CWG but there can also be formal opportunities for input such as public comment periods.

I plan to send this to the RySG for their discussion.  As the primary customers of IANA for gTLD names, the RySG has a very vested interest in this effort.  That is not to minimize all other groups but it is registries are directly impacted by IANA processes.

It sounds to me that what Alissa is suggesting is more of an outreach function and that is a very good role for the ICG.  In fact, that seems like a very good item of focus for the ICG open forum in L.A.

Chuck

From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 12:12 PM
To: CWG-DT-Stewardship at icann.org
Subject: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] FW: CWG-ICG meeting at ICANN 51

And now I / we have received this.

Thoughts or is it essentially the same point we discussed already?

It may be that we simply work with the open (ICG) forum on Thursday

Jonathan

From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa at cooperw.in]<mailto:[mailto:alissa at cooperw.in]>
Sent: 24 September 2014 01:11
To: jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com<mailto:jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com>; ocl at gih.com<mailto:ocl at gih.com>; byron.holland at cira.ca<mailto:byron.holland at cira.ca>
Cc: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben; Milton Mueller; Martin Boyle; Keith Davidson; bart.boswinkel at icann.org<mailto:bart.boswinkel at icann.org>
Subject: CWG-ICG meeting at ICANN 51

Jonathan, Byron, Olivier,

In the IANA stewardship coordination group (ICG), we’ve been discussing the possibility of having side meetings between a subset of ICG members and other constituencies that will be in attendance at ICANN 51. I’m writing to you to see if you would be interested in organizing such a meeting with the CWG working on developing a transition proposal.

Our goal with these meetings is to inform people about how they can become involved in transition proposal development (not just for names, but for the other functions as well), to encourage people to attend an open forum that the ICG is hosting on Thursday of ICANN week, and to answer questions. We have a few conditions we’ve set for all such meetings — that they be public, minuted, and, if possible, translated.

Is this something you would be interested in organizing, as part of your already-scheduled meeting time or otherwise? If not, do you think separate ICG meetings with the GNSO and/or ccNSO would make sense?

Thanks,
Alissa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-dt-stewardship/attachments/20140925/7d96acbb/attachment-0001.html>