Marika
I think it
makes sense for the CWG to continue as outlined.
Thanks
Donna
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]
On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Wednesday, 25 November 2015
6:01 PM
To: GNSO Council List (council@gnso.icann.org) <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject:
Re: [council] TR: CWG-Stewardship role in
implementation
Dear
All,
As noted in the
action item list coming out of the previous meeting, please review the message
from the CWG-Stewardship below and indicate if you have any concerns or
objections to the proposed CWG-Stewardship role in implementation by 4 December
at the latest.
Thanks,
Marika
From:
<owner-council@gnso.icann.org>
on behalf of Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@icann.org>
Date: Monday 16
November 2015 10:09
To: "GNSO Council List (council@gnso.icann.org)" <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject:
[council] TR: CWG-Stewardship role in
implementation
To: ALAC,
CCNSO, GAC, GNSO, SSAC
Cc:
CWG-Stewardship, ICG, CRISP, IANAPLAN, CCWG-Accountability, ICANN Implementation
& ICANN Policy Staff.
Dear
Chartering Organizations of the CWG IANA Stewardship,
Subject:
CWG-Stewardship role in implementation
At
ICANN54 in Dublin, the IANA Stewardship Coordination Group (ICG) confirmed
designation of the operational communities to be responsible for direct
implementation oversight of their proposals.
The
CWG-Stewardship also met during the course of ICANN54 and discussed this role
and we continued this discussion in a subsequent meeting on Thursday 5 November
2015. An oversight role is not specifically detailed in our Charter, but it is
the CWG-Stewardship’s view that our role in implementation is to ensure that the
implementation is consistent with the CWG-Stewardship Final Proposal and
furthermore, to provide input on the implementation work when required by staff
working on the implementation or, if and when necessary, to bring the
implementation work back in line with the intent of the Final Proposal.
In our
view, the most logical option is to have the CWG-Stewardship working group
continue in its current form and with the responsibility to monitor the
implementation and provide input where needed. Of course, this responsibility
would include regular updates to the Chartering Organizations via the appointed
members as well as consultations with the Chartering Organizations should issues
be identified that are deemed without this specific remit.
We note
here for your information, that while the CWG-Stewardship Final Proposal was
submitted in June 2015, the CWG-Stewardship has remained active and therefore
available when needed. This has included being available to answer questions
from the ICG, or to monitor the CCWG-Accountability dependencies and to
coordinate with the other operational communities on shared issues such as IANA
intellectual property rights.
As the
CWG-Stewardship Charter does not specifically address implementation, we would
like to ensure that the CWG-Stewardship’s proposed approach in relation to
implementation is not inconsistent with the intent of the Chartering
Organizations concerning the scope and role of the CWG-Stewardship. We therefore
propose to proceed to oversee the implementation work as described above unless
there are objections from one or more Chartering Organizations.
We would
like to emphasize that the CWG-Stewardship does not intend to change its working
methods in light of this ongoing role. The group will remain open to anyone who
wishes to join, and we will welcome informed individuals with relevant
implementation and operational experience to join the CWG-Stewardship in this
next phase.
Thank you
for your consideration of this matter and for your ongoing support of our work.
Please let us know of any concerns by no later than 30 November 2015.
Jonathan
Robinson & Lise Fuhr
CWG-Stewardship
co-Chairs