[Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 ..

Manal Ismail manal at tra.gov.eg
Mon Oct 27 10:20:53 UTC 2014


Thanks Narelle .. I fully agree .. But the answer to Q#15 is already longer than the sentence discussed below .. The Q&A now reads:

15.	What is the role of the ICANN Board in preparing the proposal?

The ICG is independent of the ICANN Board.  ICANN is represented on the ICG by two liaisons: one from the Board and one from the IANA staff.  Both liaisons are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep the Board and the ICG informed about the implications of the transition.  Like any other member of the community, the ICANN Board can submit comments through the established procedures for public comment.  Consistent with U.S. federal government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal submitted to it by the ICANN Board, but the Board does not have community approval to modify the proposal submitted by the ICG. When the ICG submits the final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to the general public and to NTIA as well.

Hope this sounds good for all ..

Kind Regards
--Manal

-----Original Message-----
From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Narelle Clark
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 9:18 AM
To: Subrenat, Jean-Jacques; mnuduma
Cc: internal-cg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 ..

In general FAQ answers should be short and to the point. So, I support the following text:

"ICANN is represented on the ICG by two liaisons: one from the Board and one from the IANA staff."

Those readers that want to understand more will happily go off and look up the list of individuals and identify where they are from precisely.

I'm not terribly concerned whether it is a longer piece or not, however. Ideally, as I said, keep it short and in plain English.

Regards


Narelle

> -----Original Message-----
> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org]
> On Behalf Of Subrenat, Jean-Jacques
> Sent: Monday, 27 October 2014 6:23 AM
> To: mnuduma
> Cc: internal-cg at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14
> ..
> 
> Dear Manal,
> 
> like Joe, I prefer the sober but accurate formulation you proposed. Thanks.
> 
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "mnuduma" <mnuduma at yahoo.com>
> À: "Milton L Mueller" <mueller at syr.edu>, "Joseph Alhadeff"
> <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com>, paf at frobbit.se, "elise gerich"
> <elise.gerich at icann.org>, manal at tra.gov.eg
> Cc: internal-cg at icann.org
> Envoyé: Dimanche 26 Octobre 2014 19:34:02
> Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14 ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +1.
> Mary Uduma
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from Samsung Mobile
> 
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
> Date: 27/10/2014 01:06 (GMT+09:00)
> To: Joseph Alhadeff
> <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com>,paf at frobbit.se,elise.gerich at icann.org,manal@
> tra.gov.eg
> Cc: internal-cg at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until 23Oct14
> ..
> 
> 
> I think the best way to say this - simplest and most accurate - is just to delete the
> word board and say "ICANN is represented on the ICG by two liaisons...."
> Making a distinction between the board and a IANA liaison is pointless detail
> that may confuse ordinary readers more than it clarifies.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-
> > bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Alhadeff
> > Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 2:30 PM
> > To: paf at frobbit.se; elise.gerich at icann.org; manal at tra.gov.eg
> > Cc: internal-cg at icann.org
> > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received
> > until
> > 23Oct14 ..
> >
> > We really don't need any more detail than that...
> >
> > Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: Manal Ismail [manal at tra.gov.eg]
> > Received: Saturday, 25 Oct 2014, 2:24PM
> > To: Patrik Fältström [paf at frobbit.se]; Elise Gerich
> > [elise.gerich at icann.org]
> > CC: internal-cg at icann.org [internal-cg at icann.org]
> > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received
> > until
> > 23Oct14 ..
> >
> > Thanks Elise, Hartmut and Patrik ..
> >
> >
> >
> > I had the same understanding too and have reflected this in earlier
> > versions .. Yet I changed the text based on the latest draft shared by
> > Jandyr on behalf of the small drafting group (himself, Lynn &
> > Xiaodong), which I recall was also supported by Jean-Jacques and Milton ..
> >
> > But I see your point and am happy to revert back to the earlier text,
> > which
> > stated:
> >
> > “The Board is represented on the ICG by one liaison. In addition,
> > there is a liaison to the ICG from the IANA Department. Both liaisons
> > are there to provide information about the IANA functions and to keep
> > the Board and ICG informed about the implications of the transition.”
> >
> >
> >
> > Is this ok? Should I also add the names ?
> >
> >
> >
> > Kind Regards
> >
> > --Manal
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:paf at frobbit.se]
> > Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 6:06 PM
> > To: Elise Gerich
> > Cc: Manal Ismail; internal-cg at icann.org
> > Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received
> > until
> > 23Oct14 ..
> >
> >
> >
> > I support this.
> >
> >
> >
> > Patrik
> >
> >
> >
> > On 25 okt 2014, at 17:13, Elise Gerich <elise.gerich at icann.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Manal,
> >
> >
> >
> > I thought the discussion on list had indicated that it is more
> > accurate to say, ICANN is represented on the ICG by two liaisons
> > rather than The Board is represented on the ICG by two liaisons.
> > Kuo-Wei Wu is the Boards liaison to the ICG, and my role is a liaison from the
> ICANNs IANA department.
> > My participation on the committee is not as a representative of the
> > ICANN Board.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > -- Elise
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg <mailto:manal at tra.gov.eg>
> > >
> > Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 at 11:48 PM
> > To: "internal-cg at icann.org <mailto:internal-cg at icann.org> "
> > <internal-cg at icann.org <mailto:internal-cg at icann.org> >
> > Subject: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ - reflecting comments received until
> > 23Oct14 ..
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear all ..
> >
> > Please find attached, and in Dropbox, a new version of ICG
> > FAQ reflecting the latest views and comments shared .. I have also attached
> > below the final compilation of answers to Q#15 & Q#16 for your convenience
> > .. Kindly note that I took the liberty to change "ICG proposal" or "ICG's
> > proposal" to "proposal submitted by the ICG", to avoid being misunderstood
> > as attributing the community's proposal solely to the ICG .. Hope this is ok
> > with everyone ..
> >
> > Happy to receive any further remarks or comments ..
> >
> > Kind Regards
> >
> > --Manal
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > 15. What is the role of the ICANN Board in preparing the
> > proposal?
> >
> > The ICG is independent of the ICANN Board. The Board is
> > represented on the ICG by two liaisons (Mrs. Elise Gerich, IANA Staff Expert;
> > and Mr. Kuo-Wei Wu, ICANN Board Liaison), who are there to provide
> > information about the IANA functions and to keep the Board and the ICG
> > informed about the implications of the transition. Like any other member of
> > the community, the ICANN Board can submit comments through the
> > established procedures for public comment. Consistent with U.S. federal
> > government procurement rules, the NTIA needs to have the final proposal
> > submitted to it by the ICANN Board, but the Board does not have community
> > approval to modify the proposal submitted by the ICG. When the ICG
> > submits the final proposal to ICANN, it will also be released to the general
> > public and to NTIA as well.
> >
> > 16. How will ICANN Board handle the final proposal
> > submitted by the ICG?
> >
> > The ICG expects that the final proposal, having achieved
> > consensus on the Coordination Group and within the Operational
> > Communities, will be welcomed by the ICANN Board and dutifully
> > transmitted to NTIA.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Internal-cg mailing list
> > Internal-cg at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Internal-cg mailing list
> > Internal-cg at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
_______________________________________________
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg


More information about the Internal-cg mailing list