[ALAC] URGENT CONSENSUS CALL: IANA Stewardship CWG Face-to-Face meeting
Alan Greenberg
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Fri Oct 24 23:18:08 UTC 2014
Nope. The world is round, and it is the start of
the weekend. I not THAT unreasonable! ;-)
Deeming will not take place for a while yet.
Alan
At 24/10/2014 06:44 PM, Holly Raiche wrote:
>By now, I may have been deemed to have answered
>yes to both - but just to confirm - yes to both
>
>Holly
>On 25 Oct 2014, at 7:27 am, León Felipe Sánchez
>Ambía <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> wrote:
>
> > Dear Alan,
> >
> > My answer to both questions is YES
> >
> > Enviado desde mi iPhone
> >
> >> El 24/10/2014, a las 13:12, Alan Greenberg
> <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> escribió:
> >>
> >> There will be a face-to-face (F2F) meeting
> of the IANA Stewardship CWG in Frankfurt on
> November 19-20. The meeting is open to all
> current Members and Participants of the CWG
> (https://community.icann.org/x/1QrxAg).
> >>
> >> ICANN is funding the participation of
> Members. The only exception is that if a Member
> cannot attend, they will fund a current
> Participant if they are approved by the SO/AC
> (an "Alternate"). The ALAC also requires that
> anyone participating must be a current member
> of the IANA-issues group and mailing list.
> Additionally, it is crucial that any Alternate
> selected have participated in the At-Large and
> CWG meetings/calls. And obviously, the person
> must be able to travel to Germany which
> excludes some people who cannot obtain a visa in such a short time,
> >>
> >> We must notify ICANN of the selection of any
> Alternate by next Tuesday, October 28. That does not leave very much time.
> >>
> >> At this stage, it is likely that two of our
> five representatives on the CWG may not be able to attend.
> >>
> >> We have two questions that must be addressed
> immediately (and I am conscious that it is
> already Friday evening or Saturday in much of the world).
> >>
> >> 1. Do we select an Alternate only from the
> same region as the regular Member who cannot
> attend? The argument against is that it puts
> into question our rationale for having 5
> members to represent all ICANN regions. The
> arguments for it is that may allow us to find
> the best person to sit at the table on our
> behalf, it is only a temporary replacement, and
> so far there have not been a lot of regional differences raised.
> >>
> >> 2. Who makes the decision of who, if anyone,
> to send. I would suggest that the ALT is the
> only practical answer given the timing.
> >>
> >> CONSENSUS CALL 1: Should the ALAC be able to
> choose any qualified person, regardless of region? YES or NO
> >> CONSENSUS CALL 2: Should the ALT be
> empowered to select Alternates for this F2F
> meeting on behalf of the ALAC? YES or NO
> >>
> >> ALAC Members: If you are silent, you are
> deemed to have answered YES to both questions,
> but it would be *FAR* better if we get actual
> answers from everyone, and preferably we should have quorum.
> >>
> >> Alan
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ALAC mailing list
> >> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >>
> >> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> >> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >
> > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> > ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
More information about the ALAC
mailing list