Dear Katrina, Byron and Jay As you will see from the informal notes from this week’s ISTP call, the members and active participants involved in the implementation work around the CWG-Stewardship proposal seek active participation from a broader group of people, in particular from Councillors and the ccNSO appointed members on the CSC (who will be actively involved in post-IANA transition work). In the view of the active members and participants in that work, things are moving rather fast and will set the parameters around PTI and hence CSC and other groups. FYI: the ISTP is a smaal coordination group from ccTLD people closely involved in the implementation of the CWG-stewardship Proposal ( Lise, Allan, Martin, Maarten and Paul, and meets regularly) Kim will send out a Doodle poll shortly for a call on 10-11 August and will include you as well, with a copy to Council. Kind regards, Bart From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org> Date: Thursday 28 July 2016 at 09:01 To: "cwg-istp@icann.org" <cwg-istp@icann.org> Subject: FW: Adobe Connect - Note Pod Content from CWG-ISTP Dear all, Please find included the informal notes from the previous call Kind regards, Bart CWG ISTP Call - 26 July @19:00 UTC 1. Welcome 2. Update CSC formation & Update RZERC a. Invite ccTLD operators on CSC future calls? 3. SLE discussion & progress 4. Progress PTI Bylaws and contract language 5. IRP status 6. Next call 7. AOB Question Bart need to send out guideline to Maarten: Done Paul Kane: Council members and CSC members - Vital stage to have Council members involved Martin: Agree flag that is members do not need to make an effort on what is going on, encourage peole to subsribe to the list. need to invite Councillors ( Action Bart) See Allan's comment in chat as well 3. Paul: meeting last Thursday Rationale for data : dashboard well recevied Extrapolate raw data During call, calls performance Some fields were incomplete, Fields were incomplete Historical data will be used. IANA staff will do All thresholds need to be filled in Not an SLE, but IANA telling what was captured. SLE call needs to happen. SHAve SLE's not been agreed? Need for DT-A to meet and Not all has filled in. SLE's being too demanding? Parameters need to follow the norms, not being out of reach. NTIA did capture time to fulfill there role in process. Timing not captured in proposed text. Document is incomplete, in area's where IAAN has not taken into NTIA role? How close are we in closing htis. Some of the processes are still blank. Document far from complete In some earea's agreement ( quite a few) agreement with Istanbul document. But still far complete Martin: struggling if we are almost there or not? Is there an explanation from IANA staff? How close we are? Depends on when IANA wil complete their task. Not significant Process needs to be completed before transition CSC will refine SLA, at the date of transition Difference between ccTLD and gTLD operate the same system. Need to investigate if there is a rationale Lise: SLE need to be finalised before the transition. From this call, on ensuring to make this happen CWG need to highlight expectation PTI Bylaws and contract Document from Sidley Bylaws out for public comment Instead of chaning bylaws art of publi comments Naming agreemtn two documents • Naming function agreement, drafted and send to CWG , disucssed upcoming Thursday • Service contract, only headings, Sidley comment on agreement in CWG Sidley advise on Annex C, to include only on naming Function Agreement ( difficult to change) Becasue of timg total package difficult Bylaws, agreement and service should be viewed a total package Paul: need to read last iteration. Sidley Service agreement is locked. Concern: cultural reason to include in Bylaws. From a pragmatic, legal point it may not be necessary, but in some cultural environments is may be very advisable/necessary Matter of Optics. As to mission statement it should focus on global community and not just on ICANN. Martin: Not chance to look at document Concern in bylaws, when new operator if and choosen in future. Looking at last iteration. Both in Bylaws and contract Implmentation concern around NTIA contract. Clarification around way C 8.2 is a concern Wider issue then in NTIA contract Two consequences: - Not a carry-over from CWG porposal Need for hymn sheet, IRP Non-discussion, Next meeting: 10-11 August Staff to send out Doodle poll.