[Internal-cg] SUBSTANTIVE: RFP Timing

Kavouss Arasteh kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Tue Aug 26 17:55:20 UTC 2014

Alissa, Others,
I have sent many proposals , suggestions and comments
No answer was given to any of them except  on an occasional  basis
This time I am firm to say that
There is no need nor it is appropriate to rush in providing the final and
définitive text of RFP to IGF due to the fact that there are some final
tuning and alignments to be made and there is no  active consultation
process in place before 01 September to do so,
Thus no need to do something in harsh .
At the maximum ,a preliminary / darft doc.  may be provided to IGF clearly
indicating that it will be finalized at f2f on 06 September.

2014-08-26 18:08 GMT+02:00 Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in>:

> On 8/26/14, 6:35 AM, "Daniel Karrenberg" <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >[I am sorry but I must have missed the consensus call on publishing the
> >RFP before the IGF. Am I the only one?]
> >
> >I was surprised that a lot of you expressed that you want to publish the
> >RFP before the IGF even though our call uncovered that the text is not
> >final today. So there will be changes. Whatever one might think about
> >the substance of those, there will be a new text which we will have to
> >agree on.
> >
> >So I must raise the question of how we agree on the final text as a
> >group. What will be the mechanism for agreement and the time involved?
> >I suggested to do this at the next f2f meeting because it does not seem
> >practical to me to achieve agreement by another mechanism before that
> >meeting. If we can agree on another mechanism that works faster, all the
> >better!
> >
> >Not using a mechanism that clearly establishes agreement is what I meant
> >with "On the Fly!".
> >
> >I have no objections against sharing the current draft with anyone,
> >including communities and IGF participants. I am not opposed to even
> >publishing it as the current draft. But until we agree as a group it has
> >to stay "draft". We could even say "Draft scheduled to be agreed on
> >September 6th" if we want to stress it is pretty stable.
> This is exactly what I was suggesting — with the hope that we can settle
> on some provisional fixes for the issues raised on the call today within
> two days, we can publish a stable draft before the IGF, continue to
> solicit feedback on the draft from our communities, and finalize it after
> the IGF, either on Sept 6, on the list, or whenever we schedule our next
> conference call.
> Alissa
> >
> >So how are we going to agree on the final text?
> >
> >Daniel
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Internal-cg mailing list
> >Internal-cg at icann.org
> >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140826/9a58c05b/attachment.html>

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list