Re: [Internetgovtech] Documents from the ICG Meeting Last Week are Available

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Wed, 23 July 2014 00:43 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B047E1A00FC for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 17:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.401
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, J_CHICKENPOX_92=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mw00mH6vEaE0 for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 17:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB631A0066 for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 17:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.147.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s6N0hDc2020644 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 22 Jul 2014 17:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1406076205; x=1406162605; bh=8qhcAhPMBs1xbBy9Qnf7/3AGOc4BcFxsEXDdIXy0MYg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=EKik3iix1McxPn9kar4DUqQcdmNz4RqWY+2Pkz7CurXjS/wzSaYTbybIGLa9stxG4 DVwUcvDEih1ZmXzI16HrsEAI83EG8qGWvFps50cIRZRzC8OwrFNinzlDMPBFxYLIRF ia1001KIERkGRTDg9b+LBFa2XiRbEOhl+BYYJ8FE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1406076205; x=1406162605; i=@elandsys.com; bh=8qhcAhPMBs1xbBy9Qnf7/3AGOc4BcFxsEXDdIXy0MYg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=ic6kY1wc0Hvi6h5hNhJKWiLk6DuSfhEumg1zKqhEnEixy9TVPBOFmrD0w57n0AplD 2ElwICLdo0k+Qxw2Kc1suNgW9JRRcOs8cbIPdcZ4dHqvumbXQhiOq2iTaocWZHkdnq VE2cEORrxE69Y5D36Xno/+/803UU9ckQWqp2iUHY=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140722143525.0c0363d8@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 16:58:18 -0700
To: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD_dc6geOVwGLvS79iX0+kZZxZzkT+PV4vYko=J80iQnRUJPmg@mail.g mail.com>
References: <A193D048-2B67-469A-93BA-C61BB362DA75@vigilsec.com> <53CD1E8A.1060804@acm.org> <CAD_dc6h_o9QNcj4O_6n78U1uDY_24OU1s5NRceUR_Dm97Q1ZdQ@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140721232728.0cc67788@resistor.net> <CAD_dc6geOVwGLvS79iX0+kZZxZzkT+PV4vYko=J80iQnRUJPmg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/internetgovtech/O_yGeLq0Bwbk2CKW_505AI8R8V0
Cc: internetgovtech@iab.org
Subject: Re: [Internetgovtech] Documents from the ICG Meeting Last Week are Available
X-BeenThere: internetgovtech@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Governance and IETF technical work <internetgovtech.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.iab.org/mail-archive/web/internetgovtech/>
List-Post: <mailto:internetgovtech@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 00:43:33 -0000

Hi Seun,
At 12:50 22-07-2014, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>Well you are right about this; i posted here about numbers to 
>qualify the "names" interest. On whether my concern was discussed in 
>relevant community, well can i assume you are also subscribed on 
>that AFRINIC IANA list, as it sure looks like the list is in 
>listening mode ;).[1] The other reason why i do respond on comments 
>that is of interest

That assumption is correct. :-)

>  on any list is because right now there is no global space to 
> discuss the transition process. For instance, the charter which ICG 
> refer to as a draft and say is up for
>  comment does not have a clear process on how they receive comments 
> beyond the 3 communities. The charter indicates that its open and 
> at the same time will receive contribution from the 3 communities; 
> how about those who like to comment on names for instance but 
> belong to the numbers community(it seem like a community based 
> restriction to me). I had thought a global space will be maintained 
> and the ICG will let us know that they are watching the list for comments.

According to a stewardship transition document there are 13 
communities: ASO, ICC/BASIS, ISOC, NRO, IETF, IAB, SSAC, RSSAC, ALAC, 
GAC, GSNO, gTLD Registries and ccNSO.  The draft charter mentions 
that the Functions are divided into three main categories.  It looks 
like the theory of those who came up with the plan is that a person 
will be able to find a representative in one of those communities to 
represent his or her interests.  The draft charter also mentions that 
there are relevant community processes and it says that the 
coordination group may refer input it receives to the relevant 
community discussion.

Let's assume that you belong to the numbers community and you have an 
interest in names.  I guess that you could contact a representative 
from 
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/coordination-group-2014-06-17-en 
for advice.

>1. I have posted my view on the list about the numbers process in 
>engaging its community and Adiel indicated he will check the 
>possibility out with the other RIRs. Will be good to read your view 
>via that medium also.

One definition of conflict of interest is "when a person has separate 
duties to act in the best interest of two or more clients in relation 
to the same or related matter, and those duties conflict, or there is 
a significant risk that those duties may conflict".  I would be 
increasing the risk by getting involved in a discussion about the 
numbers process.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy