[IOTF] ICANN 56 scheduling

[Trang Nguyen]

Hi Chuck,

I think 60-75 minute should suffice, but perhaps others would like to
weigh in on this as well? As for time slots, I don’t have any particular
preference.  

Trang



-----Original Message-----
From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com>
Date: Friday, May 6, 2016 at 1:18 PM
To: Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen at icann.org>, "Gannon, James-1"
<james-1.gannon at novartis.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in>, Alissa
Cooper via Iotf <iotf at icann.org>
Cc: Hillary Jett <hillary.jett at icann.org>, "Austin, Donna
(Donna.Austin at neustar.biz)" <Donna.Austin at neustar.biz>
Subject: RE: [IOTF] ICANN 56 scheduling

>Trang,
>
>My understanding is that the community meetings team is getting close to
>finalizing the Helsinki schedule so it would be good to nail this down as
>soon as possible.  I know that one of the things they are trying to do is
>to minimize conflicts so it would seem to me that getting them involved
>as soon as possible is important.  I cc'd Donna Austin because she has
>been representing the GNSO on the meetings team. Hopefully she can at
>least inform the team of the need and maybe even make some suggestions.
>How much time is needed?  Any more than an hour?  Have you considered
>doing it over a lunch break?
>
>Chuck
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: iotf-bounces at icann.org [mailto:iotf-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
>Trang Nguyen
>Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 3:21 PM
>To: Gannon, James-1; Alissa Cooper; Alissa Cooper via Iotf
>Cc: Hillary Jett
>Subject: Re: [IOTF] ICANN 56 scheduling
>
>All,
>
>Apologies for the delay in responding to this. We had to do a bit of
>checking internally regarding the process to request sessions for the new
>meeting B format.
>
>There are no issues with holding a transition implementation planning
>update session at ICANN56. From a process perspective, the request would
>just need to go through an SO or AC because all sessions at ICANN56 are
>scheduled by SOs and ACs. Many of you participate in an ICANN SO or AC so
>perhaps someone from the group could volunteer to propose this through an
>SO or AC? My team and I would be more than happy to help with any of the
>logistics. We just can¹t request the session because of the new meeting B
>format.
> 
>
>Thank you,
>
>Trang
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: <iotf-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of "Gannon, James-1"
><james-1.gannon at novartis.com>
>Date: Tuesday, May 3, 2016 at 8:05 AM
>To: Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in>, Alissa Cooper via Iotf
><iotf at icann.org>
>Subject: Re: [IOTF] ICANN 56 scheduling
>
>>Hi All,
>>Any follow-up on Alissa's request below?
>>
>>James Gannon
>>IGM Manager ­ Projects & IT Security SME
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: iotf-bounces at icann.org [mailto:iotf-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf
>>Of Alissa Cooper
>>Sent: 28 April 2016 23:30
>>To: Alissa Cooper via Iotf
>>Subject: [IOTF] ICANN 56 scheduling
>>
>>I was thinking that it¹s probably around the time that ICANN staff are
>>starting to put together the agenda for ICANN 56 (although you all
>>would know better than me, since the ICG is not meeting). I think given
>>the timing of ICANN 56 it will be important to have a session where an
>>implementation update can be provided by this group, including both the
>>community reps and the ICANN staff, and the community can have an
>>opportunity to comment and ask questions. Wanted to flag that idea in
>>case agenda requests are already going in. I will not be in Helsinki
>>but will follow remotely.
>>
>>Alissa
>>_______________________________________________
>>IOTF mailing list
>>IOTF at icann.org
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf
>>_______________________________________________
>>IOTF mailing list
>>IOTF at icann.org
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf
>
>_______________________________________________
>IOTF mailing list
>IOTF at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iotf