[Internal-cg] Note to CWG re timeline?

[Joseph Alhadeff]

One of our central obligations is to provide a proposal that gains broad community consensus.  If it appears that a community is facing a timing issue on developing community consensus with a need for more time to consult (including due to coordination needs with related topics) I think we need to accommodate them.  The sooner we adapt our internal timeline the better we can plan our work towards meeting the ultimate time frame.  I would support the continued parallel work in the interim on other proposals.  Finally, Alissa, I would support the outreach while stressing the need for continued diligence in working towards deadlines and keeping us regularly informed on progress during the extension.

Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 15, 2015, at 7:51 AM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de> wrote:
> 
> First of all I would appreciate this e-mail exchange staying within the ICG only until reaching a conclusion before including others (e.g. CCWG members).
>  
> Martin, during yesterday’s call I’ve referred to the flowchart you mentioned - and I add it here to put all of as to the same level. I would appreciate to discuss this furtheron.
> The charts indicates a flow – but no timeline attached to it. For me it says that the workstream 1 (accountability) input to the proposal shall come through the CWG and the CCWG (plus their respective chartering organizations). To learn more about (including timeline implications) is the intention of the note to be sent to the CWG.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Wolf-Ulrich
> 
>  
> From: Martin Boyle
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:19 PM
> To: WUKnoben ; Alissa Cooper ; ICG
> Subject: RE: [Internal-cg] Note to CWG re timeline?
>  
> Hi all,
>  
> I’m sorry not to have been able to join you on the call yesterday.
>  
> I’m not quite sure what we hope to achieve from the message to the CWG.  I’m not opposed, but what are we going to do with the response?  I’m not sure it brings us any further forward other than an admission that the date will slip.
>  
> Yesterday Jonathan Robinson & Lise Fuhr (co chairs of the CWG-Stewardship) circulated a flowchart showing conditionality of the CWG’s work on the CCWG-Accountability track.  Was this discussed last night?  I certainly see this as an important step in that it proposes an approach that recognises the dependence and shows a way to address it.  We should perhaps express willingness to discuss this with the CWG.
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Martin
>  
> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben
> Sent: 15 January 2015 10:27
> To: Alissa Cooper; ICG
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Note to CWG re timeline?
>  
> Thanks Alissa,
>  
> a note would be helpful.
>  
> With regards to the text I suggest asking the CWG also - in case of time revision - what are the major challenges they encounter (e.g. coordination with CCWG-accountability).
>  
> I've tried to insert it in your draft (see below). Please feel free to polish.
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Wolf-Ulrich
>  
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> From: Alissa Cooper
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 11:21 PM
> To: ICG
> Subject: [Internal-cg] Note to CWG re timeline?
>  
> Wolf-Ulrich suggested on the call today that we send a note to the CWG to obtain more information about their expected timeline if it does indeed slip. I’m happy to send such a note if people agree. I’ve drafted something up below.
>  
> What do others think? Should we send a note? What do you think of the text below?
>  
> Alissa
>  
> ----
>  
> Dear CWG,
>  
> The ICG has been following the developments in all of the operational communities, including the naming community. We have noted some discussions about the possibility that the CWG might require additional time to complete its response to the ICG RFP beyond its original planned submission date of January 30, 2015. We would ask that if you decide to revise your estimated completion date that you share with the ICG your revised expected timeline.
> You may also indicate the CWG’s major challenges leading to the revision and whether the ICG is deemed to coordinate here.
>  
> Thank you,
> Alissa Cooper on behalf of the ICG
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
> <Link with CCWG Accountability.pdf>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150115/a96da0bf/attachment-0001.html>