Re: [gnso-impl-irtpc-rt] IRTP WG C IRT Kick-off
hi Mike, i think "how we fit" is in our remit, because we will have a unique perspective on dependencies. but i agree that creating the larger structure that we fit *into* isn't. do a search on "program management" for tips on how to put together and manage a portfolio of inter-connected projects. i think we be a project, within a larger program. mikey On Jun 6, 2013, at 8:56 AM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Right. And this IRT must be aware of all these new changes, particularly > those that could affect its own items. > > For example, the new 2013 RAA will have validation/verification requirements. > The IRT must consider how this (not yet adopted) verification process will > affect the Change of Registrant procedure. There are probably a bunch of > unknown dependencies like that…. > > J. > > > From: Mike Zupke <Mike.Zupke@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thursday, June 6, 2013 08:50 > To: James Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@xxxxxxxxx" > <gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: RE: [gnso-impl-irtpc-rt] IRTP WG C IRT Kick-off > > Thanks, James. > The schedule/project plan is indeed topic #1. But I think the bigger > question - how does this fit into all of the rest of the work underway? - is > probably outside this group’s remit. My team (on staff) is currently mapping > out all of the implementation items we see on the horizon and trying to > figure out a way to manage those in a responsible way. I think, ultimately, > it might require a discussion with the GNSO council, but that’s as far as my > thinking has progressed to date... Happy to discuss on the call if you and > others like. > Best, > > Mike Zupke > Director, Registrar Programs > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers > > From: James M. Bladel [mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 6:01 PM > To: Mike Zupke; gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@xxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [gnso-impl-irtpc-rt] IRTP WG C IRT Kick-off > > Mike and Team: > > What is ICANN's plan w.r.t. scheduling this implementation? We are still > working on Rec 9 of IRTP-B, ERRP, TMCH, and soon New gTLDs and the 2013 RAA. > I'm concerned that these changes are starting to work against each other, and > are definitely contending for the same development resources. > > Recommend we make this Agenda Topic #1 during our first call. > > Thanks-- > > J. > > From: Mike Zupke <Mike.Zupke@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 16:39 > To: "gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [gnso-impl-irtpc-rt] IRTP WG C IRT Kick-off > > Greetings! > Welcome to the Transfer Policy Working Group C Implementation Review Team > (“IRTPWGCIRT”). I will be leading ICANN’s implementation of the GNSO’s IRTP > C recommendations, and it is my pleasure to have the opportunity to work with > you on this effort. > > As a refresher, the GNSO made 3 recommendations that were adopted by the > ICANN Board: > 1. Modify the IRTP / Create a consensus policy that would apply to > inter-registrant transfers. > 2. Revise the existing Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy related to the > expiration of the Form of Authorization used by registrars during transfers. > 3. Require registries to include registrars’ GURIDs (aka IANA IDs) in Whois > output. > > Recommendation 3 is currently being implemented by Staff, so that leaves recs > 1 & 2 for us. There is quite a bit of work to be done on these, so I’ve > created a project plan that I’d like to share with you for feedback on a > kick-off call. If you’re interested in attending, would you kindly enter > your availability in this doodle poll?: http://doodle.com/7uq5vaiyu7n8fpu8 > > Thanks in advance. I look forward to working with you. > > Sincerely, > > Mike Zupke > Director, Registrar Programs > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) Attachment:
smime.p7s
|