Comments on 16 Oct 2010 draft of Review of the TLG

[Steve Crocker <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This draft/interim report is quite good.  I agree with all of the main points.  
The comments below address small points that are worth attention to improve and 
polish the report.

1. Explain the history and current status of the IAB's involvement

The first paragraph in the Summary notes that the IAB is included in the TLG 
and elsewhere it is noted that the IAB does not participate in the rotation.  
Please add a little bit more explaining the history of this peculiarity and 
what the current status of the IAB is.  This document is a good vehicle for 
documenting this piece of history.

2. Adding the Unicode Consortium is interesting but not necessarily a good idea

Recommendation 4, one of the several recommendations for consideration if the 
main recommendation of dismantlement is not adopted, suggests adding the 
Unicode Consortium.  While there is indeed common interests in IDNs, the 
specific interactions are sometimes in conflict, and while the degree of 
conflict might not be as vigorous as the conflict between the ITU-T and ICANN, 
there might be some similarities.

3. "tacit"?

I don't understand the use of the term "tacit full Board" used in 
Recommendation 7 and elsewhere.

4. "upstart" has negative connotations.

In the text on page 13, ICANN is referred to as having previously been an 
"upstart" organization.  Perhaps "start up" would be a better term.

5. The sources listed in section 7 should include the roles of the people 
interviewed.  Also, at least one member of the management of each of the four 
organizations comprising the TLG should be included.

Thanks,

Steve Crocker
ICANN Board member
SSAC Chair
Previous SSAC Liaison to the ICANN Board