[Urgent] Public Comments on IANA proposal: collecting your inputs

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi everyone,

we have two weeks to respond to this draft proposal. I uploaded the
template in google drive  to collect your feedback and you can access here
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NRSgwIy2T_i8coErf5z3JC0LHoFhjes3K7fWhOxqDZ8/edit?usp=sharing

Please put your comments for the questions, you don't need to respond to
all of them. we will try to consolidate the comments in common responses
later for review and endorsement.

if you have any problem to access to the document , please send me email
offlist.

Best,

Rafik

2015-04-28 19:41 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>:

> Hi.
>
> It is definitely a report we have to comment in this critical process. We
> need volunteer(s) to coordinate taking inputs and comments from members.
> Everyone is encouraged to read the report and check the recording of
> webinar held next week, to get an idea about the content .we will continue
> the discussion in the list and also ad-hoc calls.
>
> The CWG is suggesting a template for the comment
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-stewardship-input-template-doc-22apr15-en.doc
> and  we should follow it.
> People can volunteer to cover part(s)  or area(s)  in the report and focus
> on. The coordinator will consolidate all the comments in one place e.g.
> etherpad . We need to review that draft later to get it approved and/or
> edited, and the submitted．
>
> We have several active  members in the CWG who can give guidance and
> support  but we need others  to participate and share the workload . We
> have ongoing discussion in this thread and it ia already a good starter.
> Please volunteer, we have to make it!
>
> For reference :
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-2015-04-22-en
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik Dammak
> NCSG chair
>
> Dear NCSG-ers:
>
>
>
> The domain names part of the IANA transition is finally being formed. A
> draft proposal was released yesterday and it is open for public comment.
>
>
>
> In my view, this is a big win for accountability. By legally separating
> the IANA functions operator from ICANN, it will be easier to hold ICANN’s
> board and staff accountable for the policy making process, and easier to
> hold the post-transition IANA accountable for its performance of the IANA
> functions. Lines of responsibility will be more direct, and policy more
> clearly separated from implementation.
>
>
>
> The proposal also promotes accountability by creating a periodic review
> process that could allow the names community to “fire” the existing IANA if
> there was great dissatisfaction with its performance. This enhances the
> accountability sought by the numbers and protocols communities as well as
> creating separability for the names community for the first time.
>
>
>
> The legal affiliate structure seems to have found the middle ground in the
> debate over ICANN’s role in the IANA functions. Although IANA will still be
> a subsidiary of ICANN, Inc., thus defusing any concerns about creating new
> organizations, it will have a separate board and a clearer line of
> demarcation between the politics of ICANN the policy maker and the
> technical coordination functions provided by the IANA functions operator.
>
>
>
> You can read the (very long) proposal here:
>
>
>
> https ://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-04-22-en
> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-04-22-en>
>
>
>
> You can comment on it here:
>
>
>
>
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-2015-04-22-en
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20150507/c38a019c/attachment.htm>