[Gnso-rpm-sunrise] [HOMEWORK] Due Wednesday, 29 May 18:00 UTC & Proposal Agenda
claudio di gangi
ipcdigangi at gmail.com
Tue May 28 23:42:34 UTC 2019
Ariel, all,
I only have comments in terms of the proposed answers to Question 1(a) and
1(b) and the associated Preliminary Recommendations. The other sections
which cover comments I sent to the list on the other threads looks great.
*Comments on the closing date of comment thread Q1*: please see my email
dated 20 May which provides a summary of questions/points raised on the
thread before the May 17 closing date, but which were not definitively
answered in my opinion. This was the subject of my email dated 22 May
(which has not been replied to as of yet).
The tentative answers to Q 1(a) and 1(b) before we discussed proposal #9
(Spanning the dot), and as included in the current document, are the
following:
On 1(a) - "The availability of Sunrise registrations only for identical
matches should not be reviewed."
On 1(b) - "The matching process should not be expanded."
*Comments on 1(a)*: I submitted a proposal that can be interpreted as not
consisting of an exact match to the current Sunrise regime, so I think the
answer may need to be modified for the following reason:
Since I submitted a proposal (along with the Sub Pro recommendation) and we
considered the topic on the merits, would it be correct to say that the Sub
team has in fact "reviewed" the issue (but depending on the ultimate
outcome, may not issue policy recommendations that changes the status quo)?
*Comments on 1(b)*: tentative answer may need to be changed to "Pending"
Under "Preliminary Recommendations" in this section, it currently states in
orange text: " Despite the lack of wide support, the proponent of
Individual Proposal #9 requested, via the Discussion Thread, that the
proposal still be posted for Public Comment in the Initial report, but not
as a Policy Recommendation. In addition to posting the proposal for public
comment, the proponent requested that the Initial Report includes a set of
questions to solicit feedback on the policy/operational issues that may
arise with the implementation of a Spanning the Dot Sunrise."
*Comments*: I think the "Despite the lack of wide support" language may
potentially be slightly misleading, because this suggestion/question was
not raised *despite* the fact there was a lack of wide support, but
*because* of it. In other words, my question was whether we can use Public
Comment as a means to help us reach Consensus in the Plenary, when a
proposal has some degree of support on the Sub team level, but has some
open questions or concerns attached.
In terms of the text: "the proponent of Individual Proposal #9 requested,
via the Discussion Thread, that the proposal be posted for Public Comment"
*Comments*: I think it is more accurate to say that my feedback came
through not as a pure *request*, but in the form of a *procedural question*,
i.e. can we follow this approach? I have no desire or intent to request
taking a course of action that is not permitted under the Working Group
guidelines - but this aspect is not coming across in the current language.
Finally, we have this topic on the agenda for tomorrow, so perhaps that is
when the co-chairs plan on discussing, but since my last note included a
request for clarification on whether a proposal can be posted for public
comment in this manner and/or presented to the plenary for consideration, I
have been holding off on submitting potential revisions until this query
has been resolved (as described in my previous emails noted above).
Thank you!
Best regards,
Claudio
On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 5:06 PM Ariel Liang <ariel.liang at icann.org> wrote:
> Dear Sunrise Sub Team members,
>
>
>
> *1. Homework* (by the beginning of the Sunrise Sub Team meeting on
> Wednesday, 29 May at 18:00 UTC)
>
> Pending any further suggestions from the Sub Team Co-Chairs, the Sub Team
> is tasked to:
>
> 1. Provide input to Discussion Threads for Agreed Sunrise *Preamble
> Charter Question* (including *Proposals #1*, *#3*, *#8*), *Q3 *(including
> *Proposals #10 & #11*), *Q4*, *Q5(a)*, *Q5(b) *(including *Proposal #7*),
> *Q6 *(including *Proposals #2 & #4)*, *Q8/Q12 *(combined), *Q9 *(including
> *Proposal #13*), *Q10*, and *Q11 -- *NOTE: Unless the Sub Team
> Co-Chairs determine otherwise, all these discussion threads will be closed
> on 23:59 UTC on 29 May 2019
> 2. Review the staff drafts of the proposed answers and preliminary
> recommendations for* Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, Q5(a), Q6, *and *Q7 *in the *Status
> Check* document, in conjunction with the latest *Summary Table *(see
> details in the “Resource” section below).
>
> *NOTE: *
>
> - Please primarily reference the *Status Check* document when
> comment/suggest edits on staff drafts of proposed answers and preliminary
> recommendations.
> - Per Sub Team Co-Chairs’ suggestion, instead of directly redlining
> staff’s document, please insert your suggested revisions/text via the
> Discussion Thread in the body of an email, or in a clean format that does
> not involve redlining staff’s draft text. This is to avoid any potential
> version confusion and keep the suggested edits easy to review/incorporate.
>
>
>
> *2. Proposed Agenda for Next Meeting*
>
> Here is a proposed agenda for the meeting on *Wednesday,* *29 May at
> 18:00 UTC*:
>
> 1. Review agenda/updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs)
> 2. Review workplan/timeline
> 3. Discuss proposed answers and preliminary recommendations *and* conclude
> the review of related individual proposals:
>
>
> 1. Q1 & Proposal #9
> 2. Q2
> 3. Q3 & Proposals #10 and #11
> 4. Q4
> 5. Q5(a)
> 6. Q6 & Proposals #2 and #4
> 7. Q7
>
>
> 1. AOB
>
>
>
> *3. Resource*
>
> *Status Check* (as of 24 May 2019):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102138618/ST%20Copy%20-%20%5BSunrise%20Status%20Check%5D%2024%20May%202019.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1558729733227&api=v2
>
> - Staff developed this document based on transcripts, chats, and notes
> of Sub Team meetings by *15 May 2019* and comments on the discussion
> threads.
> - It consolidates the Sub Team’s *draft *proposed answers to the
> agreed Sunrise charter questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5(a), 6, and 7 .
> - It also consolidates *draft *preliminary recommendations in relation
> to these agreed charter questions and reflects how they correspond to the
> proposed answers.
> - Text in orange are “tentative”. They are either potential amendment
> to *draft *preliminary recommendations as a possible result of the Sub
> Team review of Individual Proposals *or* initial
> ideas/concepts/proposals the Sub Team discussed/considered.
> - It includes a snapshot of the Sub Team’s review of all individual
> proposals.
> - Staff provided comments on the side to indicate either the overall
> status of each agreed charter question *or* additional staff note.
> - Staff will continue updating this document to reflect Sub Team’s
> deliberation on the proposed answers, preliminary recommendations, and
> individual proposals in relation to the agreed charter questions.
>
>
>
> *Summary Table* (as of 24 May 2019):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102138618/ST%20Copy%20-%20%5BSunrise%20Summary%20Table%5D%20%2824%20May%202019%29.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1558729628694&api=v2
>
> - This document is complementary to the Status Check document by
> providing details on data and additional context.
> - The current version contains the same proposed answers and
> preliminary recommendations as those in the Status Check document.
> - It also includes more details with respect to the Sub Team’s review
> of individual proposals related to those agreed charter questions.
> - Staff will continue updating this document to reflect Sub Team’s
> deliberation on the proposed answers, preliminary recommendations, and
> individual proposals in relation to the agreed charter questions.
>
>
>
> *Individual Proposals*:
>
> Relevant to the Agreed Sunrise Charter Questions, multiple individual
> proposals were submitted. Staff analysis concluded the following
> Individual Proposals are more relevant to the Agreed Sunrise Charter
> Questions being reviewed by the Sub Team in the homework assignment:
>
> - Proposal #1 (Q5b):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%231.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposal #2 (Q6):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%232.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposal #3 (Preamble Q):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%233.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposal #4 (Q6):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%234.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposal #7 (Q5b):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%237.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposal #8 (Q5b):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%238.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposal #9 (Q1):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%239.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposals #10 (Q3):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%2310.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposal #11 (Q3):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%2311.pdf?api=v2
> - Proposal #13 (Q9):
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102146375/Proposal%2313.pdf?api=v2
>
>
>
>
> *4. Documents Wiki*
>
> Access the Documents wiki page and find the opening messages of all
> discussion threads, all versions of the summary table, and other working
> documents of the Sub Team: https://community.icann.org/x/_oIWBg
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Mary, Julie, Ariel
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-rpm-sunrise mailing list
> Gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-sunrise
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/attachments/20190528/a2615665/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gnso-rpm-sunrise
mailing list