[ALAC] CWG IANA Transition Proposal Comment

[Sébastien Bachollet]

Hello,
As asked please find the proposed sentence for line 28/30


28 As detailed under the comment on section III.A.i.a, the ALAC would
prefer an IANA 
29 wholly integrated into ICANN, but is willing to accept the compromise
of a separate 
30 legal entity if the details of its organization and governance are
satisfactory. 



28 As detailed under the comment on section III.A.i.a, the ALAC would
STRONGLY preferS an IANA
29 wholly integrated into ICANN, but is willing to accept (the) A
compromise of a separate
30 legal entity if the details of its organization and governance are
satisfactory. 

But if you prefer a plural then I suggest


28 As detailed under the comment on section III.A.i.a, the ALAC would
STRONGLY preferS an IANA
29 wholly integrated into ICANN, but is willing to accept (the)
compromises (of) around a separate
30 legal entity if the details of its organization and governance are
satisfactory.


Sébastien Bachollet
+33 6 07 66 89 33
Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/
Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien at bachollet.com>




Le 19/05/2015 18:25, « Alan Greenberg » <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> a écrit
:

>See below.
>
>At 19/05/2015 03:40 AM, Sébastien Bachollet wrote:
>>Hello,
>>Thanks Alan for this draft.
>>As I am in a place where the Internet cnx is very poor, I can¹t really
>>use
>>Wiki for those comment.
>>I will try to give you my comments here.
>>- TO ADD -
>>(to remove)
>>
>>Lines 28/30 S the ALAC would - STRONGLY - preferS to accept (the) - A -
>>compromiseS
>
>"A" does not go with the plural compromiseS.
>Please give me the exact sentence you are suggesting.
>
>>Line 106 S this - TYPE OF - compromise.
>
>ok
>
>
>>Lines 143/146 I don¹t think we want to push to a possible separation from
>>ICANN. It is where we risk to loose the multistakeholder model all in
>>one.
>>If we have to go to this construct, I would like to suggest that the PTI
>>Board be either:
>>- the full ICANN Board
>>- a subset of the ICANN Board (if the IANA Board committee would have
>>been
>>still in function it would have been a good candidate).
>
>We have already said we are still debating the
>Board, so I am omitting all versions of what some
>people (including me) are suggesting. The
>sentence in question was not a reference to
>separation, but I have nevertheless changed it.
>
>Alan
>
>
>>Thanks
>>All the best
>>
>>Sébastien Bachollet
>>+33 6 07 66 89 33
>>Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/
>>Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien at bachollet.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Le 19/05/2015 07:08, « Alan Greenberg » <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> a
>>écrit
>>:
>>
>> >The first draft of the proposed comment on the CWG report has been
>>posted.
>> >
>> >The full set of community comments and the draft can be found at
>> >https://community.icann.org/x/XConAw. The PDF version of the draft
>> >comment is also attached to this e-mail.
>> >
>> >The deadline for submission is tomorrow, Wednesday, 20 May, and the
>> >ALAC will be ratifying the submission after-the-fact.
>> >
>> >If you have not yet looked at the draft comment, please do, as there
>> >is little time left to provide feedback.
>> >
>> >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+
>>>(A
>> >LAC)
>