[Internal-cg] Thinking about the assessment process

Martin Boyle Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk
Thu Jan 8 16:25:29 UTC 2015

This all looks good to me, although I suspect for the next few weeks those of us on the names side remain quite busy.

I agree with Daniel's suggestion:  a good reminder to be open about our activities.  

I have been involved in the cross-community working group developing a names proposal as a participant on behalf of my employer (Nominet, .uk) and as a liaison for the ICG.  I am also a participant in the CCWG-ICANN Accountability on behalf of Nominet.

I have not engaged in the number or protocol parameter processes at all.



-----Original Message-----
From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Russ Housley
Sent: 07 January 2015 23:25
To: Alissa Cooper
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Thinking about the assessment process

I was heavily involved in the protocol parameters response from the IETT.  I have not been involved with the creation of the responses from the names or number communities beyond reading publicly available documents.


On Jan 7, 2015, at 3:31 AM, Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net> wrote:

> I suggest that before we start the reviews each of us sends a message to this list describing their involvement, if any, in the development of proposals. This way all that is on record and we avoid accusations of hidden interests or actions.
> For myself I can state that I have had no involvement with the proposals of the names and protocol parameters communities.
> As a member of the RIPE community I have participated in the public discussion about the principles for the numbers proposal. As part of my job at the RIPE NCC I have provided advice to management about the development of the proposal. I have also worked actively within the RIR communities to explain the process and the work of the ICG.
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at icann.org

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list