[CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] IPR Memo

[Greg Shatan]

And shouldn't the names community have that opportunity now?

In any event, that doesn't mean an entire proposal would be sent back for
re-approval.

On Monday, August 10, 2015, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva at transworldafrica.com>
wrote:

>
> On 10 August 2015 at 09:46, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gregshatanipc at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> I also don't think it's accurate to state that failing to embrace the
>> CRISP proposal will result in "any of our three community proposals
>> having to go back to the community process and seek for re-approval."
>>  There's no indication that needs to happen, and stating that it will tends
>> to look like an attempt to shove the CWG into accepting the CRISP proposal
>> by proposing that some awful thing will happen if we don't. That may not
>> have been the intent, but it certainly could be the effect.
>>
>
> Certainly, if the numbering community are asked to adopt another stance
> than that in their proposal, the community has to be given a chance to
> debate and ratify. That is part of the principles NTIA expects us to
> follow: Support and enhance the multistakeholder model; and Meet the needs
> and expectations of the global customers and partners of the IANA services.
>
> My views alone.
>
> Regards
> ______________________
> Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
>
> "There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on
> higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150810/0e1e7598/attachment-0001.html>