[NA-Discuss] Asking for approval of Summit WG3 report (new gTLDs)

[Nick Ashton-Hart]

Since this has come up here, I thought I should let you know of the following, just sent to the GTLD-WG list:

Since there is a concern that the timeline published has the final vote on the new gTLD statement occurring in the week following the ending of the public comment period, it may be helpful for you to know that we have made enquiries of the relevant staff, and as is often the case it will be possible for the statement to be posted to the public comment period once the vote is concluded.

In short: the schedule published will not in any way affect the inclusion of the new gTLD statement in the public comment period.

Evan, you'll no doubt recall being notified of these facts on 31st March on the ALAC working list.


On 06/04/2009 19:31, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan at telly.org> wrote:

Hello all,

I'm coming to one of those moments of pure exasperation.

At the Summit, I was involved in working group 3 -- new gTLDs.

My WG -- like all of them -- worked hard and long hours to craft a
consensus that included not only critique but concrete recommendations
for progress. The result of this work is at
https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?statement_on_new_gtlds_applications_process_v2_al_alac_st_0309_3_en

We knew at the time that ICANN had imposed a deadline of April 13 for
comments to revision 2 of the gTLD guidebook. I have been desperately
asking ALAC for some process in evaluating the work to date, suggesting
changes, and submitting the result in time as an endorsed document. To
this end, I attended the last ALAC conference call and practically
begged for some indication that this was being taken seriously. So far I
have heard nothing from anyone except for

    1) Un-helpful comments from staff that suggested our credibility was
    at risk because of unnamed people whose views we hadn't considered.
    Weeks have passed since this staff threat was issued, yet none of
    the unnamed has stepped forward.

    2) A timetable offered by the ALAC executive, proposing a
    consultative process that ends one week after the deadline has
    passed:
    https://st.icann.org/alac-docs/index.cgi?at_large_policy_development_schedule


I have personally heard from a number of individuals, and I have
indicated their concerns in comments at the bottom of the WG3 wiki page
indicated above. I am hoping to word-craft some text that will address
these concerns. I also recall Beau stating that he had some comments but
I haven't heard any details yet.

In the meantime, I would like to know if I can ask for NARALO
endorsement of the document, in light of ALAC's absence of action (and
the breaking of a personal promise by its Chair). At this point I am
asking for a tentative endorsement while I word on wording to address
the concerns raised in my comments underneath.

- Evan


------
NA-Discuss mailing list
NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
------


--

Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart
Director for At-Large
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88
USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637
Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44
Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68
email: nick.ashton-hart at icann.org
Win IM: ashtonhart at hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart at mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart
Online Bio:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart