Milton L Mueller
mueller at syr.edu
Sun Jul 20 00:03:27 UTC 2014
i don't recall the part of the discussion yesterday where we came to the conclusion that the names communities would be able to come up with a proposal by early February. It seems unrealistic. We will be lucky to get something from them by mid-March.
While we are giving the DNS part too little time, we seem to be giving the NTIA too much time. The NTIA has the comparatively simple task of determining whether a complete proposal a) has consensus, b) meets its criteria. I don't see how that takes 3 months. Furthermore, if the NTIA needs more time beyond the Sept deadline it can extend its contract for a month, two or three. No hard constraint there.
I of course understand the need to set aggressive goals and also understand that work tends to expand to fill out allotted time, so I ask for comment by the others from the GNSO - knowing what you know about how the Council and other WGs in GNSO or CCWGs work, do you think it is realistic to ask for a complete consensus proposal from the GNSO, CCNSO and GAC by early February?
From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org <internal-cg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Paul Wilson <pwilson at apnic.net>
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 10:56 AM
To: Russ Housley
Cc: Coordination Group
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Timeline
Here’s a version with suggested changes I tried to describe.
More information about the Internal-cg