The wording looks pretty good to me. Thanks to the three of you . Chuck From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hammer Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 4:48 AM To: Grace Abuhamad; cwg-dt-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Latest Version of Charter and Notes from Meeting Hi Grace and Colleagues, Please find attached a marked-up document with the revised wording which Allan, Leon and I propose for the 'Goals and Objectives' section of the Draft Charter, as agreed in the action item from the last meeting. Apologies that we have not submitted this sooner but the challenges of opposite time zones and other commitments caused us a couple of delays. Cheers, Julie On 29 Jul 2014, at 6:00 am, Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad@icann.org<mailto:grace.abuhamad@icann.org>> wrote: Dear All, As discussed during our meeting today, please find attached the latest version of the draft charter. Notes from today's meeting are below and available on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/Qr3hAg Agenda - 28 July 2014 1. Welcome and roll-call 2. Confirmation of meeting notes and action items 3. Timeline Approval of charter and call/appointment of volunteers WG (In order to adopt charter in time, organize membership of the WG itself and have a first full-blown face to face meeting in LA, the draft charter needs to be completed by 14 August, order of approval will be ccNSO (21 August), ALAC (26 August), SSAC (2 September) and GNSO (4 September)). 4. Timelines and coordination with ICG 5. Run-through latest version of draft charter 6. AOB 7. Closure Meeting Notes / Action Items 28/7: · Meeting notes from 21/7 accepted · Byron reached out to GAC chair with reminder and re-invitation to join CWG. Action: Follow up next week for further suggestion regarding GAC participation in CWG · Add to agenda for meeting: resourcing; Root Zone maintainer; public consultation. o Resourcing was not discussed: defer for 4 August o Public Consultation – partly addressed in Timeline overview (Item 4 on the agenda) Timeline · Who will forewarn SSAC, and other groups, to allow pre-consideration — Action: Pre-warning by members and formal documentation by chairs of the convening SOs (Byron and Jonathan) to invite the SOs and ACs as well. Rationale: documentation of process. · Linking to Accountability process: to date the timeline and activities of the Accountability Process are not defined enough in detail to map them against the IANA Stewardship Transition Process. Action: Staff to evolve timeline with Accountability process when that information becomes available. Action: Share timelines with staff (Bart). Discussion draft charter · Comment 1: General agreement of attendees that goal is that WG will deliver a single proposal, while recognizing more then one could evolve, with aim to get to one proposal through iterative process. Action: Wordsmith language – volunteers for capturing language on "single proposal": Julie, Leon, and Allan · Highlighted phrase to .INT deleted · Language on Root Zone Maintaining process: re-focus on role of NTIA in Root Zone maintainer process. Action: Avri and Chuck to propose language to the group. Group aware of Chuck’s role and no objection. · Relation with Accountability Process: Avri's comment related to ICG language acceptable to all and will be included. · Start with Section III next week (4 August). <DT Charter Template - 28 July 2014.doc>_______________________________________________ CWG-DT-Stewardship mailing list CWG-DT-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-DT-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-dt-stewardship

Dear All, As per Jonathan's email, please find attached a clean and redline version in which we've incorporated the different sections discussed on the mailing list (please let us know if we've missed anything). Also included are some suggested edits to address the comments in relation to the definition of participants / observers / members. Furthermore, I've updated the definition of divergence in section IV which inadvertently seemed to have the definition of consensus. To facilitate the mailing list conversation ahead of the next meeting, we would like to propose that, similar to last week, volunteers come forward to propose specific language to address some of the remaining comments / issues and share their proposals with the mailing list. Looking through the latest version, we've identified the following issues: 1. Should additional language be included to encourage / allow for participation of new stakeholders? (comments #1, 5, 6R5) 2. Should further guidance be included on how the ICG is expected to liaise with the CWG? (comment #3) 3. Should a target deadline be included in the charter for the deliverables in the charter or should this be left up to the CWG to determine? (comment #4) 4. In relation to the sentence "Understand the views and concerns of other participants in the chartering organisation that appoints them" in section III, several comments have been made (#7 ­ 12). How should this sentence be updated to address the comments made? 5. Definition of consensus ­ it was suggested (comment #14) that a definition of minority should be included or alternatively use the definition 'a position that is supported by at least a supermajority of members'. Is there support for this change or are there other suggestions? 6. Assessing consensus and use of vote/poll (comments #15, 16 and 17) ­ if the DT would like to make reference to the possibility of using polls, you may want to consider including language similar to what is currently in the GNSO WG Guidelines, for example: In a rare case, the chair(s) may decide that the use of a poll is reasonable to assess the level of support for a recommendation. However, care should be taking in using polls that they do not become votes as there are often disagreements about the meanings of the poll questions or of the poll results. Would there be support for including a reference to the use of polls, and if so, would the proposed language work or are there other suggestions? 7. Who/how is the final report and possible additional documents (following adoption) submitted to the ICG ­ should further clarification be added (comment #20, 21) 8. Closure of the WG ­ what additional language should be added to address comments #22 and 23? If there are any additional issues that need to be addressed, please share those with the mailing list. Also, if you would like to volunteer to address one or more of these issues, please let the mailing list know. Based on the feedback / suggestions provided, staff can try to hold the pen and incorporate any language that has the support of the DT in the next iteration of the draft which will hopefully will get us close to a final version by our next meeting which has been scheduled for next Monday 11 August. Thanks, Marika From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> Date: Monday 4 August 2014 10:54 To: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad@icann.org>, "CWG-DT-Stewardship@icann.org" <CWG-DT-Stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Latest Version of Charter and Notes from Meeting All, Looking back a week and with our target to complete the draft charter on or shortly a 14 August, it seems sensible to pick up on the actions from last week. Essentially, we have agreed to try to continue to make iterative improvements over the course of this week ahead of meeting for review next week Monday. Please could staff circulate a redline and clean version of the charter as it currently stands, including incorporating the latest edits discussed / agreed on this list but not necessarily incorporated into the draft yet. Once we have this latest version, please could all DT members re-read and consider: A. Your level of comfort with current / latest edits and proposed changes (if any) B. Any changes you wish to propose to the document as it now stands (particularly section III on) Also: · GAC ­ Do we need to issue any formal note of invitation to join the CWG or should that now wait until we have the Charter in a form we are willing to distribute to all SO & ACs? · Warning of pre-consideration to SO & Acs. Informal routes agreed but supplemented by the record of a formal note from CCWG Co-chairs required. Next meeting is August 11th, 13h00 UTC. Thanks, Jonathan From: cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-dt-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad Sent: 28 July 2014 21:01 To: cwg-dt-stewardship@icann.org Subject: [CWG-DT-Stewardship] Latest Version of Charter and Notes from Meeting Dear All, As discussed during our meeting today, please find attached the latest version of the draft charter. Notes from today's meeting are below and available on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/Qr3hAg Agenda - 28 July 2014 1. Welcome and roll-call 2. Confirmation of meeting notes and action items 3. Timeline Approval of charter and call/appointment of volunteers WG (In order to adopt charter in time, organize membership of the WG itself and have a first full-blown face to face meeting in LA, the draft charter needs to be completed by 14 August, order of approval will be ccNSO (21 August), ALAC (26 August), SSAC (2 September) and GNSO (4 September)). 4. Timelines and coordination with ICG 5. Run-through latest version of draft charter 6. AOB 7. Closure Meeting Notes / Action Items 28/7: ? Meeting notes from 21/7 accepted ? Byron reached out to GAC chair with reminder and re-invitation to join CWG. Action: Follow up next week for further suggestion regarding GAC participation in CWG ? Add to agenda for meeting: resourcing; Root Zone maintainer; public consultation. o Resourcing was not discussed: defer for 4 August o Public Consultation ­ partly addressed in Timeline overview (Item 4 on the agenda) Timeline ? Who will forewarn SSAC, and other groups, to allow pre-consideration ‹ Action: Pre-warning by members and formal documentation by chairs of the convening SOs (Byron and Jonathan) to invite the SOs and ACs as well. Rationale: documentation of process. ? Linking to Accountability process: to date the timeline and activities of the Accountability Process are not defined enough in detail to map them against the IANA Stewardship Transition Process. Action: Staff to evolve timeline with Accountability process when that information becomes available. Action: Share timelines with staff (Bart). Discussion draft charter ? Comment 1: General agreement of attendees that goal is that WG will deliver a single proposal, while recognizing more then one could evolve, with aim to get to one proposal through iterative process. Action: Wordsmith language ­ volunteers for capturing language on "single proposal": Julie, Leon, and Allan ? Highlighted phrase to .INT deleted ? Language on Root Zone Maintaining process: re-focus on role of NTIA in Root Zone maintainer process. Action: Avri and Chuck to propose language to the group. Group aware of Chuck¹s role and no objection. ? Relation with Accountability Process: Avri's comment related to ICG language acceptable to all and will be included. ? Start with Section III next week (4 August).