[Internal-cg] Larry Strickling's blog
Mueller, Milton L
milton.mueller at pubpolicy.gatech.edu
Thu Sep 24 13:32:55 UTC 2015
Agree with Michael, Patrik and Jari.
The message about lack of consensus pertains primarily to the CCWG. But of course since CCWG accountability measures are incorporated by reference into our proposal we are affected by it. Let’s see what comes out of the Santa Monica meeting.
From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of michael niebel
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 7:33 AM
To: Patrik Fältström
Cc: IANA etc etc Coordination Group
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Larry Strickling's blog
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se<mailto:paf at frobbit.se>> wrote:
On 24 Sep 2015, at 13:10, joseph alhadeff wrote:
> Seems that his comments pertain mostly to the ICANN Accountability work streams. Do we need to consider any thoughts of dependency beyond the names accountability elements?
My view: Your interpretation matches mine. To answer your question: no
> On 9/24/2015 2:15 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
>> Reflections from Larry Strickling regarding the public feedback on the IANA transition proposal.
>> TL;DR transition plan good, separate accountability effort needs more work. Gives guidance for that work.
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org<mailto:Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org>
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org<mailto:Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org>
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org<mailto:Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg