Separability: picture of the relation of CWG's IFR & SCWG with CCWG process
Hi, I have attempted to draw up a discussion set of slides on the connection between the CWG process for Separability and the CCWG accountability and enforcement measures. The drive doc is open for comments: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1kmDLv0yF41lb9OBlCKnl6o3TMps6AlTF8Njs... I have also attached a PDF. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
BTW, there was no small group on this, I alone am guilty. although i did do a few sanity checks with people in the group. and no one told me i was braindead; i asked. (with apologies to the medically braindead and their families for my flippancy) Happy to talk through it with anyone. either in a meeting on line or a dark secluded room. I know it is not a work item and is more of an implementation detail, but since I believed the union of the two models worked and others weren't so sure, I figured I should draw the thing I thought would work. Hope it makes sense. And hope people point out corrections if/where it is wrong. avri On 27-Oct-15 14:38, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
I have attempted to draw up a discussion set of slides on the connection between the CWG process for Separability and the CCWG accountability and enforcement measures.
The drive doc is open for comments:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1kmDLv0yF41lb9OBlCKnl6o3TMps6AlTF8Njs...
I have also attached a PDF.
avri
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Dear Avri, This is extremely helpful and an excellent contribution! Questions: 1) As per Annex L of the CWG proposal (Para 1390), wouldnt the recommendation of the IFR for the creation of the SCWG also require GNSO & ccNSO supermajority approval and CM approval? Accordingly, I have created a revised version of the process that I understood (in a separate document since I am not able to add it your document). Please correct me if I am wrong. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1NYLD847RoUWZDOT-_1wIlsHxjXo3guax-tYE... 2) How would the procedure comparatively differ in case of a membership model? Would board approval be replaced by member approval in both steps where board approval is required? Or would the member approval be invoked only after board rejection? 3) In case the board is spilled and then reconstituted, would the process begin from square 1 (reconstitution of IFR), or would the process continue from the point where it was rejected by the spilled board? 4) Under what scenarios can arbitration be invoked in case of board rejection? Say the board rejects the recommendation citing security and stability - in that case on what grounds can the community resort to arbitration - which bylaw would the board have vitiated for arbitration to be invoked? Thanks. Guru On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
Hi,
I have attempted to draw up a discussion set of slides on the connection between the CWG process for Separability and the CCWG accountability and enforcement measures.
The drive doc is open for comments:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1kmDLv0yF41lb9OBlCKnl6o3TMps6AlTF8Njs...
I have also attached a PDF.
avri
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
On 27-Oct-15 16:13, Guru Acharya wrote:
Dear Avri,
This is extremely helpful and an excellent contribution!
Questions:
1) As per Annex L of the CWG proposal (Para 1390), wouldnt the recommendation of the IFR for the creation of the SCWG also require GNSO & ccNSO supermajority approval and CM approval? Accordingly, I have created a revised version of the process that I understood (in a separate document since I am not able to add it your document). Please correct me if I am wrong. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1NYLD847RoUWZDOT-_1wIlsHxjXo3guax-tYE...
Good catch, I should have remembered/checked. I have updated the picture. (as you did not include the picture in this first email) besides i like playing with the doc in drive.
2) How would the procedure comparatively differ in case of a membership model? Would board approval be replaced by member approval in both steps where board approval is required? Or would the member approval be invoked only after board rejection?
I do not think it is that different, though the SD model relies more on powers put in the articles and the bylaws than on the notion of membership. (Speaking as a non lawyer who does not really know.)
3) In case the board is spilled and then reconstituted, would the process begin from square 1 (reconstitution of IFR), or would the process continue from the point where it was rejected by the spilled board?
I do not see why it would need to restart. Would probably require a reconsideration. Probably take a sequence like: - ask for reconsideration - start the spill process and ask for a hold on the reconsideration until suc time as a new board was seated - complete the reconsideration but I am just guessing at this point based on current process. I am not sure what the deadlines for reconsideration would be in the new regime.
4) Under what scenarios can arbitration be invoked in case of board rejection? Say the board rejects the recommendation citing security and stability - in that case on what grounds can the community resort to arbitration - which bylaw would the board have vitiated for arbitration to be invoked?
From what I understand it has to be between persons on a matter related to a bylaw or the articles.
Hopefully others who know more will weigh in. avri
Thanks. Guru
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org <mailto:avri@acm.org>> wrote:
Hi,
I have attempted to draw up a discussion set of slides on the connection between the CWG process for Separability and the CCWG accountability and enforcement measures.
The drive doc is open for comments:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1kmDLv0yF41lb9OBlCKnl6o3TMps6AlTF8Njs...
I have also attached a PDF.
avri
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
participants (2)
-
Avri Doria -
Guru Acharya