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

Fri Jan 20 20:52:45 UTC 2017

30 DAYS after ICANN 58 IS THE LAST DEADLINE
tKS
ka

2017-01-20 21:51 GMT+01:00 Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com>:

> I think two weeks is fine.  What is the rush here?
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
> RODENBAUGH LAW
> tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087 <(415)%20738-8087>
> http://rodenbaugh.com
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> If the BC follows a procedure similar to IPC, any comment is supposed to
>> be on the general mailing list for a week after it is drafted (by a
>> drafting team, typically), so that the membership can read and comment and
>> revise the comment before it is submitted.  (Sometimes, the period is
>> shorter than a week, due to a variety of circumstances, but IPC aims for a
>> week.)  A one week extension may not allow sufficient time for the comment
>> to be revised and then put on the list.  I think it's fair to assume that
>> Steve would not ask for such an extension lightly, since he has been in our
>> shoes (and your shoes) before. So, I think we should give his request every
>> benefit of the doubt.
>>
>> I would suggest (a) a dialogue with Steve about the shortest time he and
>> the BC can get this done, and (b) you figure out the latest we can receive
>> it without pushing our timeline back (and any subsequent "knock-on" effects
>> from that push-back), and share that with Steve.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:33 PM, McAuley, David <dmcauley at verisign.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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. 9
>>> th.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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 <(703)%20948-4154>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *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>
>>> *Date: *Thursday, January 19, 2017 at 7:15 PM
>>> *To: *Karen Mulberry <karen.mulberry at icann.org>
>>> *Cc: *BC Executive Committee <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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IOT mailing list
>>> IOT at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iot
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IOT mailing list
>> IOT at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iot
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IOT mailing list
> IOT at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iot
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iot/attachments/20170120/7cabc5fb/attachment.html>