[CCWG-ACCT] Time to make a decision (was Re: Responses to Rafael's Questions)

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

I disagree,

the charter does does not say, ship something, anything, to make the transition happen, it says what accountability measures must happen so that (before) the transition can happen, and which ones can wait until after it has happened.

el

-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini 4

> On 6 Feb 2016, at 20:53, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 09:31:03PM +0000, Perez Galindo, Rafael wrote:
>> 
>> For that reason, I believe it should be very carefully analyzed and assessed, from an implementing and legal POV. Such a decision cannot be taken in a rush, without considering its consequences and possible side effects.
> 
> I agree it should be carefully analysed and contemplated, but that
> analysis and contemplation should take place before the next call not
> dedicated to Rec. 11 (my calendar seems to think that's Tuesday).
> 
> The CCWG needs to come to a close and ship something -- even a report
> out that there's no solution would be better than more delay.  There
> is simply no more time to dither.  The transition (or its failure) is
> waiting on this CCWG's output.  The operational communities need to
> know what their next available range(s) of action will be.
> 
> Moreover, if the GAC really cannot accept this proposed compromise, it
> seems at least to me that the hope of any compromise ever being
> reached is roughly zero.  Therefore, the CCWG members should vote on
> something and move on.  I vastly prefer consensus, but in the
> community where I usually work we would have declared this consensus
> rough some time ago and closed the discussion.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community