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

Fri Jan 20 20:53:42 UTC 2017

Deadline set by whom, for what?

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
http://rodenbaugh.com

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
> wrote:

> 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/20170120/45d50845/attachment-0001.html>