[IOT] FW: QUESTION FOR ACTION FW: [Ext] Request for 2-week extension of public comment period on IRP Supplemental Procedures

[McAuley, David]

Dear IRP IOT members,



I just saw this note this morning.



I am tempted to agree a ONE WEEK extension later today but wanted you to see this first.



This would give a requested extension but would also allow us a good chance to look at comments and staff write-up at our next meeting Feb. 9th.



If you have concerns please let me know. Because of the short time frame with deadline looming I am planning to agree the one week extension later today – sorry this is such a short-fuse item.



David



David McAuley

International Policy Manager

Verisign Inc.

703-948-4154



From: Karen Mulberry [mailto:karen.mulberry at icann.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 9:24 PM
To: McAuley, David; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Mathieu Weill; Thomas Rickert (thomas at rickert.net)
Cc: ACCT-Staff
Subject: [EXTERNAL] QUESTION FOR ACTION FW: [Ext] Request for 2-week extension of public comment period on IRP Supplemental Procedures



I have just received a request for an additional extension to the IOT-IRP Public Comment period on the IRP Supplemental Procedures.



Please let me know if you wish to grant this request for an additional extension to the Public Comment period.



Sincerely,



Karen Mulberry

Multistakeholder Strategy and Strategic Initiatives (MSSI)

ICANN







From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco at netchoice.org>>
Date: Thursday, January 19, 2017 at 7:15 PM
To: Karen Mulberry <karen.mulberry at icann.org<mailto:karen.mulberry at icann.org>>
Cc: BC Executive Committee <bc-excomm at icann.org<mailto:bc-excomm at icann.org>>
Subject: [Ext] Request for 2-week extension of public comment period on IRP Supplemental Procedures



Hi, Karen.



As the staff contact for Updated Supplementary Procedures for the IRP[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2Dcomments_irp-2Dsupp-2Dprocedures-2D2016-2D11-2D28-2Den&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=Q_fMdPzWh_dPIFRoT0_RCyUZ-mS0xeE4EeQTxa_ckQI&m=WCws5VokF-q1trXfNjFDT4Bd1j1VoFNdzrbyH2mc7G0&s=ytvyKVEZ_Bqi2Qmydd-mrhrGmFwdVIYIN8R6fPb125k&e=>, we are contacting you to formally request a 2-week extension to the public comment period.



The period is scheduled to end 25-Jan, and we are requesting an extension to 8-Feb, at the earliest.



The justification to grant this extension is that we only just received a legal analysis and recommendations for the proposed procedures.    Sidley Austin, attorneys to the CCWG, prepared a legal memo (attached) that was shared with the BC membership only last week (12-Jan).   We’d like to incorporate some of Sidley’s analysis, and need additional time to have BC members review the changes.



I do not see any great urgency to the adoption of IRP procedures, so I hope this request can be granted.



Glad to field questions you may have about this request.



Regards,

Steve



Vice chair for policy coordination

ICANN Business Constituency



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iot/attachments/20170120/b20042c5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Sidley - Response to Certified Question of CCWG IRP IoT - January 4, 2017.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 704434 bytes
Desc: Sidley - Response to Certified Question of CCWG IRP IoT - January 4, 2017.pdf
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iot/attachments/20170120/b20042c5/Sidley-ResponsetoCertifiedQuestionofCCWGIRPIoT-January42017-0001.pdf>