[Internal-cg] FAQ update ..

Tue Dec 2 05:21:10 UTC 2014

Dear Manal,
You will see a trend in my request to please revise any stand alone
references to IANA.  There is no independent entity called IANA.  It is more
correct to use the word IANA with ³functions operator² or ³stewardship² or
³functions², and those revisions will be consistent with the rest of the
document.  The examples to be revised are noted below.

1) For question 9, is it possible to remove the stand-alone IANA since it is
not qualified as the IANA functions nor as the IANA functions operator?
Below is the proposed text without the superfluous ³IANA².  The text that is
deleted is highlighted in yellow and has a line thru it.

The ŒOperational Communities¹ of IANA are communities with direct
operational or service relationships with the IANA functions operator, in
connection with internet names, numbers, or protocol parameters, namely the
Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), the Country Code Names
Supporting Organisation (ccNSO), the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs),
the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and the Internet Engineering Task
Force (IETF).

2) For question 13, isn¹t it more correct to say:  ³Can I submit my own
proposal for how the IANA stewardship transition should take place?² Added
the word ³stewardship² which is highlighted in yellow.  The committee¹s
charter is to come up with an IANA stewardship transition which is more
specific than the general statement of IANA transition.  The phrase ³IANA
transition² is repeated in the response to question 13, and should be
revised to include the work stewardship also.

3) In response to question 22, it says: ".  After receiving consensus
proposals from the operational communities regarding IANA, the ICGŠ²  Please
modify IANA with ³functions² or ³stewardship² or ³operator².  There is no
entity called ³IANA².

Thank you for all the work you have done on behalf of the committee to
maintain and update the FAQ.

Best regards,
-- Elise 

From:  Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>
Date:  Monday, December 1, 2014 at 5:01 AM
To:  WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>, "internal-cg at icann.org"
<internal-cg at icann.org>
Subject:  Re: [Internal-cg] FAQ update ..

> Dear All ..
>  
> Reference to the below exchange, please find attached, and on Dropbox, an
> updated version of the FAQ reflecting Wolf-Ulrich's below suggestion and some
> edits to Q#12 to reflect the most recent discussions ..
> I re-iterate my suggestion to update the posted FAQ as soon as possible .. I
> believe this was supported by colleagues who responded so far as well as by
> Alissa on our last call ..
>  
> I believe all edits are either minor or non-controversial .. The only
> substantial edits are that of questions 12 & 15 .. So in case some colleagues
> do not agree to having them posted as attached, I suggest that we proceed with
> all the rest and postpone those two for now ..
>  
> Awaiting your feedback ..
>  
> Kind Regards
> --Manal  
>  
> 
> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On
> Behalf Of Manal Ismail
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 1:30 PM
> To: WUKnoben; internal-cg at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] FAQ update ..
>  
> Thank you Wolf-Ulrich ..
> I thought this point is already covered and, in fact, is the focus of Q#16 ..
> Would you still like to have it added to Q#15 too?
>  
> Kind Regards
> --Manal
>  
> 
> From: WUKnoben [mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:57 PM
> To: Manal Ismail; internal-cg at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] FAQ update ..
>  
> 
> Thanks very much Manal. I agree with Kavouss to amend the already published
> FAG accordingly asap.
> 
>  
> 
> I¹m ok with it but have a slight amendment to #15 (Board¹s role) inserted.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Wolf-Ulrich
> 
>  
> 
> From:Manal Ismail <mailto:manal at tra.gov.eg>
> 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 10:13 AM
> 
> To:internal-cg at icann.org
> 
> Subject: [Internal-cg] FAQ update ..
> 
>  
> 
> Dear All ..
>  
> I have paused our FAQ discussions based on what Alissa suggested, in her email
> dated 27 October, 2014:
> "I think beyond the FAQ text (and probably before we add the new text to the
> FAQ web site), the main thing we need to agree on as the ICG is the full list
> of what our plans, requirements, and expectations are vis a vis the proposal
> submission process."
>  
> Yet, before we lose track, I'm attaching (also on Dropbox) a version, dated
> 24Nov14, which I hope accurately reflects all previous discussions .. I
> suggest that, as we have agreed that the FAQ is going to be a living document,
> that we do not delay its posting pending finalization of discussions on all
> questions .. As a living document, it's hard to have a complete perfect
> version all the time .. Additionally, the FAQ has to provide timely
> information and some questions are more urgent than others .. So my suggestion
> is that, as we continue discussion on the Board role, if the current answer is
> still unsatisfactory to some, we can proceed with other updates such as Q#19
> on whether the target deadline has been delayed, and Q#22 on the relationship
> between the ICG work and the ICANN accountability process ..
>  
> If acceptable, I would hence suggest that ICG members skim through the track
> changes and identify any questions were there are still concerns or
> uncompleted discussions .. We can then halt updates concerning those specific
> questions and proceed with the rest ..
> I think we should also have some way to highlight new or modified questions as
> well as the date of last update, on the online version ..
>  
> How does this sound?
> Looking forward to receiving your views and any other suggestions for better
> ways forward ..
>  
> Kind Regards
> --Manal 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141202/24256e6b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5037 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20141202/24256e6b/smime-0001.p7s>