[Internal-cg] IETF response to ICG

Paul Wilson pwilson at apnic.net
Fri Jan 9 00:48:04 UTC 2015

I have an alternative suggestion, that the ICG members from the proposal’s community could carry out the assessment as required in Step I, and document thoroughly and specifically how the proposal satisfies the given criteria (i.e. A1/2/3 and B1/2/3).  This is something that can be done much more readily and thoroughly (IMHO) by ICG members who already understand the proposal fully.  

This initial assessment (to be produced by say 30 Jan) would then be reviewed by the rest of the ICG, and discussed in detail during the face-face meeting on Feb 6/7 in Singapore.  

And I assume Step I will have some kind of formal “sign off” by the ICG as a whole before we move on to Step II (whether we do that in Singapore or later).

Does that make sense?


Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net                                     +61 7 3858 3100

On 7 Jan 2015, at 8:58 am, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in> wrote:

> Thank you, Jari.
> It would be great if we could get some volunteers to conduct Step I of the finalization process <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-transition-assembly-finalization-24dec14-en.pdf> for this proposal, say within the next 2 weeks. Please respond to the list if you’re willing to conduct this assessment.
> Thanks,
> Alissa
> On Jan 6, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko at piuha.net> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> As you know, the IETF has been working on the protocol parameters
>> aspects of the transition. We created the IANAPLAN working group, 
>> developed a proposed response, and held community discussions. 
>> And of course, there has been a lot of past evolution in this space 
>> as well.
>> This part of the process is coming to an end from our side. Our 
>> steering group, the IESG, approved the proposed response on 
>> December 18, and after some minor editorial changes, the 
>> document has been formally approved today, January 6.
>> The link to our proposal is below, and we look forward to working
>> with the ICG and other communities on the next steps. We are
>> committed to ensuring a good outcome for the Internet in
>> this topic.
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-09
>> Jari Arkko
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list