[CPWG] Statement on ODP Concept Paper v2.0

[Alan Greenberg]

My preference is to not add that for the following reasons:

- it is indeed a valid question, but it is a result of the insertion 
of the GNSO Liaison into the equation, which is out main point of 
contention - and why the GNSO Council itself is even the focus.

- I am a bit worried that they may address your point and ignore the 
main one - it is FAR easier to address than putting back some sort of DFG.

Let's discuss further.

Alan

At 2021-01-19 12:01 PM, Hadia  Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi wrote:
>Thanks Alan for the statement, I had a comment in relation to the 
>flow chart on the last page of the concept paper.  The flow chart 
>indicates a direct path of communication between the GNSO council 
>and the ODP team other than the GNSO Council Liaison/Liaisons to the 
>ODP group. More clarification is required in relation to this other 
>means of communication between the ODP team and the GNSO council and 
>if you have some other direct means of communication between the 
>council and the ODP team why do you need a Liaison?
>
>Hadia
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
>Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 6:45 PM
>To: CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
>Subject: [CPWG] Statement on ODP Concept Paper v2.0
>
>At the last CPWG, I was asked to draft a statement on the 
>Operational Design Phase Concept Paper (v2.0).
>
>The draft statement is now posted to the wiki
>(https://community.icann.org/x/qgNACQ) and is attached here for your 
>convenience.
>
>The deadline for submission is Friday, 22 January 2021.
>
>Alan