[CWG-Stewardship] Request for Communication with CWG-Stewardship on Naming Related Functions
Jonathan Robinson
jrobinson at afilias.info
Wed Mar 25 14:08:27 UTC 2015
Thanks James,
Likely Friday I think.
Jonathan
-----Original Message-----
From: James Gannon [mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net]
Sent: 25 March 2015 10:01
To: Grace Abuhamad
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Request for Communication with
CWG-Stewardship on Naming Related Functions
Could we maybe get this added as a quick discussion point for the F2F
tomorrow/Friday?
James
On 25 Mar 2015, at 09:06, Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org> wrote:
> Dear all < this has been sent to the Chairs. Forwarding to the group.
>
>>
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: Request for Communication with CWG-Stewardship on Naming
>> Related Functions
>> Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 13:57:55 +0900
>> From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp>
>> To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>, Lise Fuhr
>> <lise.fuhr at difo.dk>
>> CC: Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com>
>>
>> Dear Jonathan and Lise,
>>
>>
>> I am writing to you as Chair of the Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship
>> Proposal (CRISP) team, responsible for preparation of the numbers
>> community's response to the ICG's Request for Proposals.
>>
>> It was helpful to have the update on the CWG for Naming Related
>> Functions progress at the session in Singapore, including the revised
>> timeline of the process proposed by the CWG-Names, with a CWG-Names
>> proposal submission in June later this year. This revised timeline
>> increases the need for collaborative and constructive work in the ICG
>> as well as between all three stakeholder communities to progress
>> efficiently with the timeline. We remain positive that a proposal
>> satisfactory to all parties, can be produced through this process.
>>
>> The ICG's decision to seek proposals from the three separate affected
>> communities reflects the distinct needs, mechanisms and historical
>> development of these three communities. At the same time, developing
>> a proposal that satisfactorily addresses stewardship of all the IANA
>> functions is a priority for all parties.
>>
>> With this in mind, I would like to request that the Chairs of the
>> CWG-Names communicate directly to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the
>> CRISP team, regarding any proposals or developments that might affect
>> the numbers community in advance, and not wait for the final
>> submission to the ICG.
>>
>> This level of direct communication and collaboration will allow all
>> communities to consider the impact and potential compatibility issues
>> among the proposals ahead of the ICG consolidation process, consult
>> appropriately within their communities, and, if necessary, develop
>> appropriate responses efficiently, rather than wait for inputs from
>> the numbers community after the ICG consolidates proposal from all
>> the operational communities. Such bottom-up consideration by all
>> communities will be essential to the authority and success of any
>> final proposal to the NTIA.
>>
>> I look forward to hearing of your continued progress, and to work
>> collaboratively with you to achieve a successful outcome for all, of
>> the IANA Stewardship transition.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Izumi Okutani, Alan Barrett
>> CRISP Team Chair, Vice-Chair
>> ___________________
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
More information about the CWG-Stewardship
mailing list