[council] RE: [CCWG-ACCT] Timeline and next steps (updated)

["McGrady, Paul D." <PMcGrady@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

All,

The IPC would like to join the chorus of folks who are pointing out the 
unrealistic timeframe of this usually short comment period and a GNSO call on 
the subject which occurs before the comment period closes.  Since the IPC and 
its member organizations are composed primarily of volunteers, the volume of 
the latest proposal is significant, and the issues are complex, we doubt we 
will have our comment in before the end of the rushed comment period.  We also 
do not think that the GNSO Council will likely be in a position to opine on the 
proposal, other than perhaps to compile anecdotal data about how the community 
is reacting to the latest draft.

I personally believe that we should push ICANN for more time for a realistic 
comment period in line with the magnitude of this proposal.  For example, the 
New gTLD Program Implementation Review Draft Report was given 76 days and this 
seems at least  - or a whole lot more! - important than that.  The Council 
should also be given time to digest those comments prior to opining.  I don't 
think that ICANN is doing any favors by compressing these timeframes, 
especially during the holidays.

We will, of course, all work as hard and as fast as we can, but the idea of 
having anything close to final by our December Council call just isn't 
realistic.

Best,
Paul


From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 9:10 PM
To: McGrady, Paul D.
Cc: Council; thomas@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Timeline and next steps (updated)

Hi Paul,

As I understand it, the Council is expected to indicate by the close of the 
public comment period whether there any major concerns that could potentially 
affect the chances of approval of the Final Proposal or if there aren't any, 
whether it is likely that the Council would be able to support the proposal as 
it stands. The actual consideration of the Final Proposal for approval would 
not happen until January after the CCWG has confirmed the Final Proposal 
following review of the public comments and input received from the Chartering 
Organizations. I've copied in Thomas so he can correct me if I am wrong.

Best regards,

Marika

On Nov 20, 2015, at 20:56, McGrady, Paul D. 
<PMcGrady@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:PMcGrady@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hi Marika,

Just so that I am clear and can take back an accurate message to my 
stakeholders, the proposed schedule would have the GNSO Coucil give its up or 
down on the CCWG-Accountability proposal 3 days after the end of public 
comment, with that 3 day period ending on Christmas Eve.  Do I have this right?

Best,
Paul


Paul D. McGrady Jr.

Partner

Chair, Trademark, Domain Names and Brand Enforcement Practice

Winston & Strawn LLP
35 W. Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60601-9703

D: +1 (312) 558-5963

F: +1 (312) 558-5700

Bio<http://www.winston.com/en/who-we-are/attorneys/mcgrady-paul-d.html> | 
VCard<http://www.winston.com/vcards/996.vcf> | 
Email<mailto:pmcgrady@xxxxxxxxxxx> | winston.com<http://www.winston.com>

[Winston & Strawn LLP]


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 7:28 AM
To: Council
Subject: [council] FW: [CCWG-ACCT] Timeline and next steps (updated)

Please use this version of the timeline instead.

From: 
<accountability-cross-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxx>>
 on behalf of León Felipe Sánchez Ambía 
<leonfelipe@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:leonfelipe@xxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thursday 19 November 2015 07:20
To: Accountability Cross Community 
<accountability-cross-community@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:accountability-cross-community@xxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: cc staff all <cc-staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cc-staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Timeline and next steps (updated)

An earlier version of this email was sent mistakenly so please disregard the 
earlier version and have this version as the final version.

=================


Dear all,

As indicated on call #68, we have designed a detailed roadmap of key dates and 
milestones toward finalizing theThird Draft Proposal that we invite you to read 
and mark in your calendars.

In order to meet our 30 November deadline, it will be important that we all 
comply with this calendar of deliverables to ensure feedback and edits are 
incorporated into the Third Proposal in a prompt and appropriate fashion:

20-Nov-15

Full Proposal content is delivered to CCWG by 23:59 UTC

21-23 Nov-15

CCWG Co-Chairs and Rapporteurs gather feedback from Working Party groups, legal 
counsel and Advisors

23-Nov-15

CCWG final comments on Full Proposal content due  by 23:59 UTC

24-Nov-15

Weekly call #69

24-25-Nov 15

Back and forth and finalizing content with Co-Chairs, Writing team holding the 
pen

25-Nov-15

Content due to translation / formatting by 23:59 UTC

26-Nov-15

Additional CCWG-ACCT call (call #70)

30-Nov-15

Begin Phase 2 of Consideration by Chartering Organizations

30-Nov-15

Begin professional proofreading/final editing

12 -Dec-15

Translations ready

20-Dec-15

Delivery of final proofreading/editing

21-Dec-15

End of public comment and first close for Chartering Organizations to indicate 
support for recommendations

24-Dec-15

Staff summary of public comments and Chartering Organization support for 
recommendation


Please note that in consideration of the work load, we recommend holding an 
additional next week on Thursday  26 November at 14:00-16:00 UTC. For US-based 
colleagues, the timeslot was selected so that it is early in day for you in 
consideration of the U.S. holiday.

We recognize that we are operating under tight deadlines to produce our Third 
Draft Proposal and as always, thank you for your cooperation and hard work.

Best regards

Mathieu, Thomas, León


The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. Therefore, if 
this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. 
Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. 
Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author.
The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. Therefore, if 
this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. 
Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. 
Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author.