[CWG-Stewardship] Request for Communication with CWG-Stewardship on Naming Related Functions

[Jonathan Robinson]

Thanks James,

Likely Friday I think.

Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: James Gannon [mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net] 
Sent: 25 March 2015 10:01
To: Grace Abuhamad
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Request for Communication with
CWG-Stewardship on Naming Related Functions

Could we maybe get this added as a quick discussion point for the F2F
tomorrow/Friday?

James

On 25 Mar 2015, at 09:06, Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org> wrote:

> Dear all < this has been sent to the Chairs. Forwarding to the group.
> 
>> 
>> 
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: Request for Communication with CWG-Stewardship on Naming 
>> Related Functions
>> Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 13:57:55 +0900
>> From: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp>
>> To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>, Lise Fuhr 
>> <lise.fuhr at difo.dk>
>> CC: Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com>
>> 
>> Dear Jonathan and Lise,
>> 
>> 
>> I am writing to you as Chair of the Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship 
>> Proposal (CRISP) team, responsible for preparation of the numbers 
>> community's response to the ICG's Request for Proposals.
>> 
>> It was helpful to have the update on the CWG for Naming Related 
>> Functions progress at the session in Singapore, including the revised 
>> timeline of the process proposed by the CWG-Names, with a CWG-Names 
>> proposal submission in June later this year. This revised timeline 
>> increases the need for collaborative and constructive work in the ICG 
>> as well as between all three stakeholder communities to progress 
>> efficiently with the timeline. We remain positive that a proposal 
>> satisfactory to all parties, can be produced through this process.
>> 
>> The ICG's decision to seek proposals from the three separate affected 
>> communities reflects the distinct needs, mechanisms and historical 
>> development of these three communities. At the same time, developing 
>> a proposal that satisfactorily addresses stewardship of all the IANA 
>> functions is a priority for all parties.
>> 
>> With this in mind, I would like to request that the Chairs of the 
>> CWG-Names communicate directly to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the 
>> CRISP team, regarding any proposals or developments that might affect 
>> the numbers community in advance, and not wait for the final 
>> submission to the ICG.
>> 
>> This level of direct communication and collaboration will allow all 
>> communities to consider the impact and potential compatibility issues 
>> among the proposals ahead of the ICG consolidation process, consult 
>> appropriately within their communities, and, if necessary, develop 
>> appropriate responses efficiently, rather than wait for inputs from 
>> the numbers community after the ICG consolidates proposal from all 
>> the operational communities. Such bottom-up consideration by all 
>> communities will be essential to the authority and success of any 
>> final proposal to the NTIA.
>> 
>> I look forward to hearing of your continued progress, and to work 
>> collaboratively with you to achieve a successful outcome for all, of 
>> the IANA Stewardship transition.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> 
>> Izumi Okutani, Alan Barrett
>> CRISP Team Chair, Vice-Chair
>> ___________________
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship

_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship