[Internal-cg] Conference call?

Thu Jul 10 20:30:33 UTC 2014

Im also on the call but have a probleme to be heard. I have tried twice now to request to speak but...seem no one heard me. My question was about the reason behind GAC's request.

- a. 

On July 10, 2014 8:20:38 PM GMT+00:00, Narelle Clark <narelle.clark at accan.org.au> wrote:
>
>Am on the call however in a noisy airport lounge.
>
>
>Narelle
>
>--
>
>
>Narelle Clark
>Director of Operations - Deputy CEO
>
>Australian Communications
>Consumer Action Network
>Suite 402
>Level 4, 55 Mountain St
>Ultimo NSW 2007
>Ph: 02 9288 4000
>Direct: 02 9288 4007
>Fax: 02 9288 4019
>TTY: 02 9281 5322
>
>
>
>
> "Lynn St.Amour" <Lynn at lstamour.org> wrote:
>
>
>Hi Milton,
>
>a note came in yesterday - from Alice Jansen
>
>included here:
>
>Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Alice Jansen <alice.jansen at icann.org>
>> Subject: [Internal-cg] Coordination Group Call 01 - Thurs, 10 July -
>20:00-21:00 UTC
>> Date: July 9, 2014 5:37:19 PM EDT
>> To: "internal-cg at icann.org" <internal-cg at icann.org>
>>
>> When: Thursday, July 10, 2014 8:00 PM-9:00 PM. Coordinated Universal
>Time
>> Where: Conference ID – 92957255 - Dial-in numbers:
>http://adigo.com/icann/
>>
>> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
>> **Thursday, 10 July 2014**
>> 20:00-21:00 UTC
>> Timezone converter:
>http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Coordination+Group+-+Call+01&iso=20140710T20&ah=1
>>
>>
>> Bridge details:
>> Dial in Numbers - http://adigo.com/icann/
>> Conference ID – 92957255
>>
>> Should you need a dial-out for this call, please contact ICANN staff.
>> The call will be recorded.
>>
>
>
>
>On Jul 10, 2014, at 3:16 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>
>> As far as I can tell no one has told us the call-in information for
>the CG conference call that is supposed to happen in about 45 minutes.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org
>[mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff
>> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 1:13 PM
>> To: internal-cg at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Timeline
>>
>> Colleagues:
>>
>> Perhaps the first step is a publication and comment on our
>operational processes, objectives and input methodology, including
>consultation mechanisms for those of us representing constituencies. 
>That might give people some comfort in relation to the transparency of
>our own group's operation?  This is likely implied in 1 and 2, but I
>think we should be more explicit.  I understand that this may be more
>relevant to work other than our own, but issues of optics and comfort
>with the fairness, inclusiveness and transparency of the process have
>been huge issues as of late in IG discussions...
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> On 7/10/2014 1:00 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
>> I thought it would be useful to start discussion of some of the
>topics that the group needs to deal with. I’m sending you some thoughts
>on the timeline of events looking forward. This is a rough draft and
>for discussion purposes only. Please comment!
>>
>> —
>>
>> What is described below reads as one timeline, but it may be
>important to understand that we actually have multiple parallel
>efforts: protocol parameters, addresses, and names. These efforts have
>several points of linkage, but allowing parallel operation is probably
>a good idea. As a result, the timeline may run at slightly different
>speeds for the different parts.
>>
>> The NTIA has said that the September 2015 deadline is not firm, and
>that they could extend contracts and prolong the process beyond that. I
>do believe, however, that there are several reasons why getting done by
>then is at least useful if not even necessary. First of all, I think we
>all need a goal. And open-ended timelines lead to open-ended
>discussions. Second, people, administrations, political climate, etc.
>may change. So I think we should work towards September 30, 2015. But
>of course, we also want a good proposal to go forward.
>>
>> In thinking about what is needed before completion, I think see at
>least the following tasks:
>>
>> 1. Communities: Communities coming up with plans.
>>
>> 2. Coordination and alignment. This includes possible iteration and
>even going back to the communities. It also includes, possibly, some
>acceptance phase with the global community for the assembled plan. For
>instance, the assembled complete plan should probably be something that
>the customers of IANA are happy with. In other words, coordination can
>be lead by the coordination group, but it likely includes a lot of work
>also in the communities.
>>
>> 3. Test run. We may want to show off that the system can actually run
>in the proposed way for a while.
>>
>> 4. NTIA evaluation and approval process.
>>
>> The community processes are in my opinion the most important ones,
>and should involve most of the work. In addition, they tend to run for
>long times. For instance, the simplest IETF last call would be a month
>already. We also want to give time to the NTIA to do what they need to
>do. And we should not optimistically assume that there is no need to
>adjust and iterate over the initially submitted plans. Which may
>include some additional time confirming with various communities that
>changes are OK.
>>
>> I’m a little unclear how much testing/demonstration we need.
>Arguably, the IETF probably runs the system it needs already. But there
>are other parts where some re-organisation and re-thinking is needed.
>Not really clear to me how much confidence building would be needed for
>those parts. Does anyone have thoughts on this?
>>
>> In general, I think we should run this process as the much ourselves
>as possible, and have everything (including criteria fulfilment) very
>clearly spelled out for the NTIA, rather leaving any substantial work
>for them. But they’ll still need some time to process. And we might
>again need to come back and change something.
>>
>> I guess what I’m coming to is trying to get going pretty early, so
>that we can iterate in later stages.
>>
>> The tasks are obviously overlapping. For instance, the coordination
>group should do coordination from day 1, by understanding what the
>communities are doing and pointing out if they are going into
>conflicting directions or if there are parts that are not being
>addressed.
>>
>> So here is one possible overall timeline:
>>
>> Step 1: Communities' work - ready by Dec 30, 2014 (6 months)
>>
>> Step 2: Coordination and alignment, including iteration - ready by
>March 30, 2015 (+3 months)
>>
>> Step 3: Acceptance and communication - ready by May 30, 2015 (+2
>months)
>>
>> Step 4: Testing - ready by July 30, 2015 (+ 2 months)
>>
>> Step 5: NTIA evaluation and acceptance - ready by September 30, 2015
>(+2 months)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>_______________________________________________
>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

-- 
Sent from my Android device. Please excuse my brevity.