<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>Dear colleagues,</DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">my take
from the ICANN52 meeting in Singapore re the IANA Stewardship Transition and the
future ICG related work:</DIV>
<UL>
<LI>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">see
<STRONG>statement from Steve Crocker</STRONG>, ICANN Board
Chair:</DIV></LI></UL>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT style="COLOR: "><SPAN><FONT style='face: "Times' New
roman?><<</FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT style="COLOR: "><SPAN><FONT style='face: "Times' New
roman?><EM>We have received several questions requesting clarification as to
how ICANN will handle receipt of the proposal from the ICG and the Work Stream
1 proposal from the CCWG. We hope the following will be
helpful.</EM></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT style="COLOR: "><SPAN><FONT style='face: "Times' New
roman?><EM>NTIA is expecting coordinated proposals from both groups.
They cannot act on just one. Further, they expect the ICG proposal will
take into account the accountability mechanisms proposed by the CCWG. We
are heartened by the close coordination between the groups, including liaisons
from the ICG to the CCWG. ICANN is expecting to receive both proposals at
roughly the same time. When ICANN receives these proposals, we will
forward them promptly and without modification to NTIA. As we have previously
stated, if we do submit the proposals with an accompanying communication of
comments, they will be on points we had already shared with the community
during the development of the proposals.</EM></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT style="COLOR: "><SPAN><FONT style='face: "Times' New
roman?><EM>We therefore encourage the groups to continue coordinating closely
to ensure ICANN receives the proposals together and is able to provide them to
NTIA in a coordinated manner.</EM></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT style="COLOR: " face="Times New Roman"><SPAN><EM>With
respect to improvements in our accountability, we are definitely open to
improvements</EM>.</SPAN></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
>></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000"> </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
He’s referring to the Names Community Proposal as an output from the
CWG-stewardship and the CCWG-accountability.</DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
Consequently the ICG would have to accomodate the overall timeline
accordingly.</DIV>
<UL>
<LI>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000"><STRONG>Larry
Strickling, NTIA</STRONG> Assistant Secretary, in a session on Sunday, 09
Feb., pointed out that NTIA is expecting a common proposal from the three
communities (protocols, numbers, names). The proposal as a whole should be
ready for implementation.</DIV></LI></UL>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
>From this point of view I wonder whether the names and protocol proposals
delivered in the present version reach this level of readiness. I’d like to
suggest beginning a related ICG discussion about. this item and the potential
consequences.<BR><BR>Best
regards<BR><BR>Wolf-Ulrich<BR><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>