Alissa,

Generally this looks good. A couple of comments:

If some of the comments are more "policy" than legal/contractual, we may need to expand the review team (still keeping it small, though). We'll have to see what comments we get, but we should be prepared either in advance or to act quickly if the comments go beyond the named team's scope.

I'f CWG needs to comment quickly in/around September 15/16, we'll need to consider how to deal with that (I'll leave that primarily to Jonathan and Lise, of course).

Similarly, there are a number of steps to cover (mostly on the CWG/names side) before "communities approve signing" is a reality.

We have not focused on rules and procedures for the CCG will get drafted, and when. Conceivably we don't need them until the CCG needs to act, and there may be existing models of how to deal with this (or not deal with this) relatively close at hand.

Greg

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:

I put together the following proposed timeline for the handling of the IANA IPR comments:

----

Sept 12 - Public comment period ends

Sept 14 - Jorge/Sam/Josh produce initial assessment of how to address comments received and redlined agreements (if appropriate). Lawyers to share those on iana-ipr@nro.net.

Sept 15-16 - Communities discuss comment assessment and redlines internally and raise issues for group discussion on iana-ipr@nro.net.

Sept 19 - IANA IPR group call (2 hours) to discuss comment assessment and redlines.

Sept 21 - IANA IPR group call to finalize agreements, if not already finalized.

Sept 22 - IETF Trust meets to approve signing
Communities approve signing

Sept ?? - ICANN Board meeting to approve signing (not sure if Board meeting is required, but current schedule shows a regular Board meeting on Sept 17, which is too early)

Week of Sept 26 - Agreements signed
CCG members announced

——

Obviously some of this depends on the comments we receive. So far he have received just one, a supportive comment from the NRO. [1] But in any event the suggestion is that since the legal folks did so well working through various compromises before the public comment period, that we would ask them to produce the initial assessment of the public comments. This timeline also gives us a bit of a buffer at the end in case things slip by a day or two.

I think it would be good to get rough agreement around the timeline because it implies that the various parties will need to have their own processes for final sign-off, and those need to be scheduled in advance. I will put this on our agenda for tomorrow.

Alissa

[1] http://ianacg.org/pipermail/ianaiprpubliccomment_ianacg.org/2016-August/thread.html

_______________________________________________
Iana-ipr mailing list
Iana-ipr@nro.net
https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr