[PC-NCSG] Joint SO/AC/SG Leaders' Statement on the IANA Globalization Progress?

[Avri Doria]

I think it is more important to get an NCSG stmt out than to wait for 
the Leaders to do one.

And i think it is more important to make the extra point thant to accept 
the lowest common denominator.

So if the idea is to wait until the leaders have made up their mind, and 
thus delay, I say never mind, just send the NCSG stmt.

And if Amr is right, then don't bother signing the Leader's stmt.  I did 
not see the issue.

avri


On 17-Mar-14 14:52, William Drake wrote:
> Hi
>
> I think Amr?s right about the thinking behind "transition key Internet
> domain name functions to the global multistakeholder community.?
>
> Insofar as this statement could be read as at odds with the one being
> pushed within NCSG, I?m not clear how we could endorse both.  In any
> event, you might want to hold of and see how things evolve rather than
> rush; the world doesn?t need to hear from us before anyone else.
>   Different groups in the SO/AC are proposing amendments and the text is
> not stable.
>
> Bill
>
> On Mar 17, 2014, at 6:16 PM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at EGYPTIG.ORG
> <mailto:aelsadr at EGYPTIG.ORG>> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a question. The first paragraph stating that:
>>
>>> We, the signatories to this statement, welcome the announcement by
>>> the U.S. Commerce Department?s National Telecommunications and
>>> Information Administration (NTIA) to transition key Internet domain
>>> name functions to the global multistakeholder community, a
>>> development that was envisaged since the early days of the Internet
>>> Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions contract.
>>
>> Isn?t this a little different than saying that we welcome the
>> announcement, and the opportunity for the global mulistakeholder
>> community to collectively develop a proposal/plan for the transition,
>> rather than a transition TO THE global multistakeholder community?
>>
>> Just wondering if I?m reading it right or not.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Amr
>>
>> On Mar 17, 2014, at 5:26 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Marie-Laure,
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Hope we got endorsement soon, also being synchronized.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> On Mar 18, 2014 12:53 AM, "marie-laure Lemineur"
>>> <mllemineur at gmail.com <mailto:mllemineur at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Hi,
>>>
>>>     We need to discuss this at our excom level. But I think we will
>>>     join, since we already issued a statement, if we want to be
>>>     consistent we should also support this statement.
>>>
>>>     I will let you know in the course of the day-.
>>>     best,
>>>
>>>     mll
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Rafik Dammak
>>>     <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>         Hello,
>>>
>>>         proposal for statement to be signed by SO/AC/SG "leaders" .
>>>         reviewing it, I think that I can sign it and hope to get
>>>         support from you on this matter. we will need the
>>>         cross-community work in the coming months.
>>>
>>>         Best Regards,
>>>
>>>         Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>>         __
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>