[CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT

Tue Dec 23 13:48:49 UTC 2014

Hi,

I agree.  Forcing this group to go through the DIDP is not the full
transparency and cooperation that we should expect in this process.

avri

On 22-Dec-14 22:16, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> I must say that I find this level of bureaucracy totally unreasonable.
> This is not someone from outside the organization trying to get ICANN
> to reveal some secret, it is a properly chartered ICANN CWG trying to
> understand its task mandated by the Board.
>
> Alan
>
> At 22/12/2014 09:49 PM, Grace Abuhamad wrote:
>> Hi James,
>> I understand that there is a tight timeline, but the person seeking
>> the information should submit the request, not staff.
>> --Grace
>>
>> From: James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net
>> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net> >
>> Date: Monday, December 22, 2014 4:08 AM
>> To: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org
>> <mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org> >, "Gomes, Chuck"
>> <cgomes at verisign.com <mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>, Alan Greenberg
>> <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> >, Guru
>> Acharya <gurcharya at gmail.com <mailto:gurcharya at gmail.com>>, Avri
>> Doria <avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>>
>> Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>"
>> <cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
>> Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT
>>
>> Hi Grace,
>>  
>> Given the tight timelines involved here could a member of staff
>> manage/expedite a response on behalf of the chairs/CWG?
>>  
>> *From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org
>> <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>
>> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org
>> <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Grace Abuhamad
>> *Sent:* Monday, December 22, 2014 5:51 AM
>> *To:* Gomes, Chuck; Alan Greenberg; Guru Acharya; Avri Doria
>> *Cc:* cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT
>>  
>> Dear all,
>> For a more fulsome response to your questions on obtaining the
>> Contingency Plan, please submit a request through ICANN’s Documentary
>> Information Disclosure Policy, available at
>> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/didp-2012-02-25-en
>> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/didp-2012-02-25-en>.
>>  
>> *From: *<Gomes>, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com <mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>
>> *Date: *Thursday, December 18, 2014 4:55 AM
>> *To: *Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
>> <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> >, Grace Abuhamad
>> <grace.abuhamad at icann.org <mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org> >, Guru
>> Acharya <gurcharya at gmail.com <mailto:gurcharya at gmail.com>>, Avri
>> Doria <avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>>
>> *Cc: *"cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>"
>> <cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
>> *Subject: *RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT
>>  
>> At a minimum, we should ask what needs to be done to allow some
>> review of it.
>>  
>> Chuck
>>  
>> *From:*cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org
>> <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>
>> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org
>> <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Alan Greenberg
>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 18, 2014 12:08 AM
>> *To:* Grace Abuhamad; Guru Acharya; Avri Doria
>> *Cc:* cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT
>>  
>> I believe that any such document must be shared with the CWG, if only
>> with the Co-Chairs or some specific sub-set of the CWG who of course
>> must sign an appropriate confidentiality document and perhaps get
>> clearance for what they share (with an appeal process in the case of
>> a disagreement).
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> At 17/12/2014 10:46 PM, Grace Abuhamad wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We looked into this and noted that the Continuity & Contingency Plan
>> is confidential and cannot be distributed.
>>
>> Notes, transcripts, and recordings for RFP4 call are available here:
>> https://community.icann.org/x/MYcQAw
>> <https://community.icann.org/x/MYcQAw>
>> *
>> *Best,
>> Grace
>>
>> From: Guru Acharya <gurcharya at gmail.com <mailto:gurcharya at gmail.com>>
>> Date: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 8:05 AM
>> To: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>>
>> Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>"
>> <cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Composition of MRT
>>
>> Hi Avri,
>>
>> This was an action item for the staff from the call on 25th November.
>> I believe they have already put in a request for the document with
>> the IANA staff. Maybe Grace or Marika can update us on the request.
>>
>> "*ACTION staff : Ask IANA staff to share details on 7.3 that might be
>> available for the public and/or online*"
>> On 17 Dec 2014 17:29, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org
>> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Is that 'transition to a "successor  contractor" plan' available to
>> the CWG?
>> avri
>> On 17-Dec-14 05:26, Matthew Shears wrote:
>>
>>
>> Alan
>> Section C.7 in the current contract addresses issues of continuity of
>> operations - particularly C.7.3, according to which ICANN should have
>> a transition to a "successor
>> contractor" plan in place at the moment
>> Matthew
>> On 12/17/2014 3:38 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>>
>>
>> As someone whose ICANN 'job" is supporting/defending the needs of
>> Internet users, I will point out that security and stability of the
>> IANA functions is of paramount importance for the ALAC as well.
>> I look forward to the seeing how that can be assured in a potentially
>> disruptive switch of the IANA operator where it may be that there is
>> no continuity of either staff or systems.
>> Alan
>> At 15/12/2014 03:16 PM, Donna Austin wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> All
>> I largely agree with Christopher. I think we are creating complexity
>> where it does not necessarily need to be, but as we are here I want
>> to reiterate a few comments I made on the RFP 3 call earlier today,
>> and these comments come from a gTLD registry operator perspective:
>> ·         Operational stability and reliability of the IANA service
>> is imperative to the business operations of registry operators and as
>> such this should be a critical consideration in any discussions.
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship>
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141223/a1f01968/attachment.html>