April 2016 - CWG-Stewardship

FW: [client com] IFRT Recommendations for Contract, SOW or CSC Charter Amendments
by Jonathan Robinson April 13, 2016

April 13, 2016

All, Please review below and provide any relevant input as soon as possible. Thanks, Jonathan From: Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com] Sent: 12 April 2016 02:33 To: Client Committee <cwg-client(a)icann.org> Subject: [client com] IFRT Recommendations for Contract, SOW or CSC Charter Amendments Dear All, There is an open question in the ICANN draft bylaws relating to IFRT-recommended amendments to the IANA Naming Function Contract, SOW and the CSC Charter (Section 18.6(a)(i)). ICANN had requested a consultation right on amendments to the Contract and SOW since it is a party to the Contract. On the CWG call, there was a comment on whether the consultation right for the ICANN board was appropriate. The CWG proposal does not contemplate an ICANN consultation right. Paragraph 272 of the CWG proposal states: 272 The review could identify recommended amendments to the IANA SOW to address any performance deficiencies, or to the CSC charter to address any issues or deficiencies. The process of developing and approving amendments will take place through a defined process that includes, at minimum, the following steps, in advance of an amendment to either document being proposed: › Consultation with the IANA Functions Operator; › Consultation with the CSC; › Public input session for ccTLD and gTLD operators; and › Public comment period. Best regards, Sharon SHARON R. FLANAGAN SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 555 California Street Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 415 772 1271 sflanagan(a)sidley.com <mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com> <http://www.sidley.com> www.sidley.com <http://www2.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SIDLEY_150-AUTOSIG.png> **************************************************************************************************** This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us immediately. ****************************************************************************************************

8 10

Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Notes, Recordings, Transcript CWG IANA Bylaws Review Meeting | 11 April 2016
by Seun Ojedeji April 13, 2016

April 13, 2016

Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 11 Apr 2016 6:39 p.m., "Brenda Brewer" <brenda.brewer(a)icann.org> wrote: > > > · Question 9: change to reflect confirmation of the question: CSC liaison is intended to come from RrSG or NCSG. Only restriction is > that this not be from a gTLD registry. > SO: That there is still a "or" between NCSG and RrSG makes me wonder what this mean in practice; that NCSG will not appoint if RrSG appointed a liaison first or the other way round? Secondly, what's the use of a liaison since the DUO are components of the GNSO. I have not gone to the proposal to check if this is inline but it seem like an overkill to me. > · Question 10: no change. > > · Question 11: the "it may be appropriate" section can be placed in the Charter. It is not for inclusion in Bylaws. > > · Question 12: no change. > > · Question 13: We can keep the clarification and refer to the original text as inclusive of the broader community of 'consumers'. > SO: sounds more broadly inclusive and clear than the alternative. Or an > alternative: direct customers of the naming services" (text used for CSC). That text is as follows: "Any necessary additions to the > IANA SOW to account for the needs of the consumers of the IANA naming functions [and/or] the ICANN community at large". > > Question 22: no support for defining a simple majority. There is support for use of consensus. The CWG-Stewardship > proposal states that the SCWG would follow the stndards established by the CCWG-Principles. > SO: Is this referring to the current CCWG framework open for PC or principles that will be set in the charter of each CCWG? If the former then fine(although I would note that having such mindset early would have been a good thing), however if it's the later I guess the high-level principles of the SCWG is indeed what we are discussing and I don't think it's something to be determined later. Regards > · Question 24: no change > > · Other comments: Sharon has one question regaring 18.4a. Will reach out to Avri and Matt to clarify. > > · Paul Kane noted concerns with consistency in Bylaws language and focus on gTLDs. > > Action (Sharon): Reach out to Avri and Matt with Client Committee in copy about language in 18.4a. > > 2. AOB > > Next meeting (Thursday 14 April at 16:00 UTC). Group may not need a meeting on Thursday. The implementation update and other items > may be able to be provided via email. > > Action (Chairs): Due to time constraints on this call, Chairs will discuss and revert back to group with next steps. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship >

3 3

Notes, Recordings, Transcript CWG IANA Bylaws Review Meeting | 11 April 2016
by Brenda Brewer April 12, 2016

April 12, 2016

Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Bylaws Review Meeting on 11 April will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/RieAAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda Action Items Action (Sharon): Reach out to Avri and Matt with Client Committee in copy about language in 18.4a. Action (Chairs): Due to time constraints on this call, Chairs will discuss and revert back to group with next steps. Notes 1. Review of CWG-Stewardship responses on Bylaws (lead by DT leads for each section) * Question 8: response approved with "direct customers" * Question 9: change to reflect confirmation of the question: CSC liaison is intended to come from RrSG or NCSG. Only restriction is that this not be from a gTLD registry. * Question 10: no change. * Question 11: the "it may be appropriate" section can be placed in the Charter. It is not for inclusion in Bylaws. * Question 12: no change. * Question 13: We can keep the clarification and refer to the original text as inclusive of the broader community of 'consumers'. Or an alternative: direct customers of the naming services" (text used for CSC). That text is as follows: "Any necessary additions to the IANA SOW to account for the needs of the consumers of the IANA naming functions [and/or] the ICANN community at large". * Question 14: no change. * Question 15: no change. * Question 16: Suggest going back to original CWG proposal language ("reasonable consultation with SOs and ACs") * Question 17: clarification on the definition of performance. * Question 18: no change * Question 19: no change * Question 20: Suggestion for "as many individuals be appointed as possible". Agreement no to specify any numbers. * Question 21: no change * Question 22: no support for defining a simple majority. There is support for use of consensus. The CWG-Stewardship proposal states that the SCWG would follow the stndards established by the CCWG-Principles. * Question 24: no change * Other comments: Sharon has one question regaring 18.4a. Will reach out to Avri and Matt to clarify. * Paul Kane noted concerns with consistency in Bylaws language and focus on gTLDs. Action (Sharon): Reach out to Avri and Matt with Client Committee in copy about language in 18.4a. 2. AOB Next meeting (Thursday 14 April at 16:00 UTC). Group may not need a meeting on Thursday. The implementation update and other items may be able to be provided via email. Action (Chairs): Due to time constraints on this call, Chairs will discuss and revert back to group with next steps.

4 3

Implementation Blog: Building an Enhanced, Community Empowered ICANN
by Grace Abuhamad April 12, 2016

April 12, 2016

Original link: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/building-an-enhanced-community-empowered-ic… Building an Enhanced, Community Empowered ICANN The submission of the IANA Stewardship Transition Package to the U.S. Government last month marked the end of an impressive proposal development effort by the global multistakeholder community. It also marked the beginning of the next, intense period of work, to ensure that the proposals can be implemented in a timely manner if they’re accepted. We’ve seen significant progress since the submission, with a great deal of focus for ICANN and the community on updating ICANN’s Bylaws. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has said they need to see adoption of any changes to ICANN’s Bylaws before they can complete their anticipated 90-day review. To meet this aggressive timeline, immediately following the ICANN55 meeting in Marrakech, a drafting team was formed consisting of ICANN’s legal team and the two external law firms involved with the Community Working Group (CWG-Stewardship) and Cross Community Working Group (CCWG-Accountability). The drafting team is working closely with representatives of all the involved community groups and theICANN Board to ensure that the updated Bylaws accurately reflect the recommendations in the IANAStewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) and the CCWG-Accountability proposals. Consistent with the current timeline, we will post the new draft Bylaws for a 30-day public comment period on 20 April 2016, with tentative adoption by 27 May. The Bylaws will only become effective upon the successful completion of the transition. We are also continuing our joint planning efforts to remove NTIA’s administrative role from the root zone management system (outlined in my recent blog update), and as announced last week, ICANN and Verisign are currently undertaking a 90-day “parallel testing” period of the Root Zone Management System (RZMS). The parallel testing period is part of the proposal that ICANN and Verisign submitted toNTIA in August 2015. Additionally, we hope to complete two other critical agreements this month – the Service Level Agreement with the five Regional Internet Registries (RIR) and the Memorandum of Understanding Supplemental Agreement with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). We will make the drafts of these agreements available for a 30-day public review period prior to ICANN Board consideration. To keep everyone informed on all these strands of planning, we will start publishing weekly updates on icann.org beginning next week. I encourage anyone who’s interested in the transition’s implementation details to check back for those updates. There are 25 weeks left until the end of the current term of the IANA Functions contract with NTIA. We clearly have a lot of work to do as an organization and a community to be fully prepared, but the end goal of an enhanced, community empowered, independent ICANN, is well within sight.

1 0

Canceling the call on Thursday 14 April
by Grace Abuhamad April 12, 2016

April 12, 2016

Dear all, Since we had a call on Monday this week, we will cancel the call on Thursday 14 April. We will plan on a call for Thursday 21 April at 16:00 UTC. Please look for invitations from Brenda to appear shortly. Best, Grace -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE.

1 0

Updated Responses to Bylaws Coordination Group
by Grace Abuhamad April 12, 2016

April 12, 2016

Dear all, Please see attached a revised version of the responses document per the call yesterday. There are two items from Sharon that are currently being discussed on the mailing list, and we will update the document with the outcomes of those discussions if needed. The responses are due to the Bylaws Coordination group by tomorrow (13 April), so please provide your feedback by 19:00 UTC in order to allow sufficient time to compile and finalize the responses for the Chairs to send through. Thank you, Grace -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE. From: <cwg-stewardship-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org> Date: Saturday, April 9, 2016 at 7:41 AM To: "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org> Cc: Sharon Flanagan <sflanagan(a)sidley.com> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Please review for Monday: Responses to Bylaws Coordination Group Dear all, Please see attached the compiled set of responses from our DT leads. Please review these responses in time for the call on Monday at 15:00 UTC. For reference the Bylaws document and original list of questions are also attached. Seun had commented on Avri’s document, so I included his comments in this document as well. Thank you Avri (and Matt), Donna, and Chuck for your efforts to get the responses drafted by Friday! Best, Grace -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE.

1 0

FW: [Internal-cg] bylaws feedback
by Mueller, Milton L April 12, 2016

April 12, 2016

Dear colleagues, The chair of the ICG and several additional members have some important concerns about the draft bylaws. > -----Original Message----- > From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces@ianacg.org] On Behalf Of > Alissa Cooper > Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 1:49 PM > To: IANA etc etcCoordination Group <internal-cg(a)ianacg.org> > Subject: [Internal-cg] bylaws feedback > > I have looked a bit at the draft bylaws and I’d like to ask Kavouss and Milton > to bring the following issue back to the bylaws drafting group: > > Section 1.1(d)(ii) incorporates by reference a number of documents external > to the bylaws as a means to prevent challenges on the basis that those > documents conflict with or violate the bylaws. In particular, bullet (D) applies > this provision to "the IANA Naming Function Contract between ICANN and > PTI effective [October 1, 2016]." > > Given the ICG's historical encouragement of the community to meet > timelines necessary for a successful transition, I find this provision to be > extremely problematic. It incorporates a reference to a document that does > not exist yet and that is unlikely to be completed by the time the bylaws are > supposed to be done (early June). In fact, it is not even clear at this point > whether the new ICANN affiliate to be setup will be name "PTI" or have > some other name. I don't understand how anyone can reason about > whether 1.1(d)(ii) is an acceptable bylaws provision if it references a > document that has not been written. (This also applies to (B) and (C) since it > could apply to future documents that haven’t been written yet.) > > Furthermore, I question whether it is a sound decision to essentially allow for > documents external to the bylaws to be able to modify the bylaws (under > (F)). This section would make more sense if it was entirely internally > specified, without the references to external documents. At a minimum, I > think we should recommend that (D) be removed. > > Thanks, > Alissa > _______________________________________________ > Internal-cg mailing list > Internal-cg(a)mm.ianacg.org > http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org

2 1

Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] [bylaws-coord] DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS - 2 April 2016 version - SCWG
by Christopher Wilkinson April 11, 2016

April 11, 2016

Good evening: With reference to the Sidley draft of April 2, 2016 ("Questions and Clarifications for Bylaws Coordination Group"), I wish to make a specific comment relating to Question 22 referring to Section 19 of the draft Bylaws concerning the SCWG ("Separation Cross Community Working Group".) Section 19.5 addresses the Composition of the SCWG and the voting rights of its members and liaisons. Section 19.7 (a) addresses the SCWG decision-making procedure. During the CWG conference call on April 4, Sidley raised the issue of how to define the majority of the SCWG (Section 19.7(a)) in the absence of a consensus. The bar of 50+1% was proposed. (Question 22.) I submit that this bar is far too low, and that the general principle of consensus must be maintained. Section 19.5 of the draft Bylaws provides for SCWG to be composed of 13 voting members, 5 non voting liaisons and unlimited other participants. Among the voting members, GNSO and the ccTLDs would hold 9 votes; more than a majority of 7. However, eventual separation of the IANA/PTI function from ICANN would have far reaching implications for many stakeholders which go well beyond the specific interests of DNS Registries and Registrars. It would not be appropriate for the representatives of the Registries and Registrars to be able to determine a separation decision, acting alone, absent consensus in the SCWG. If the proposed composition and voting rights in an SCWG are maintained, it is absolutely essential that the SCWG act by consensus and not by a majority vote. Regards Christopher Wilkinson Begin forwarded message: > From: Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill(a)afnic.fr> > Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: [bylaws-coord] DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS - 2 April 2016 version > Date: 3 Apr 2016 14:16:21 GMT+02:00 > To: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> > > Dear colleagues, > > In anticipation of our calls this week, please find below a note from the lawyers group, the draft bylaws as well as an issue list. > > It is important to read the lawyers notes as they quite efficiently describe the context and status of the work. Please review them for any process related question. > > The purpose of our calls this week will be to address the issue list questions (questions 1-7 & 25-34 are for the CCWG, the others for CWG). > > Should any other issue be added to the list based on your respective reviews, please raise your questions on the list for transparency. > > Best regards, > > Mathieu > --------------- > Depuis mon mobile, désolé pour le style > > Début du message transféré : > >> Expéditeur: John Jeffrey via bylaws-coord <bylaws-coord(a)icann.org> >> Date: 3 avril 2016 13:16:28 UTC+2 >> Destinataire: bylaws-coord(a)icann.org >> Cc: "Flanagan, Sharon" <sflanagan(a)sidley.com>, "Cc: Zagorin, Janet S." <jzagorin(a)sidley.com>, "Hilton, Tyler" <thilton(a)sidley.com>, ICANN-Adler <ICANN(a)adlercolvin.com>, "Hofheimer, Joshua T." <jhofheimer(a)sidley.com>, "Mohan, Vivek" <vivek.mohan(a)sidley.com>, "Clark, Michael A." <mclark(a)sidley.com>, "Boucher, Rick" <rboucher(a)sidley.com>, Sidley ICANN CCWG <sidleyicannccwg(a)sidley.com>, "Kerry, Cameron" <ckerry(a)sidley.com>, "McNicholas, Edward R." <emcnicholas(a)sidley.com>, Daniel Halloran <daniel.halloran(a)icann.org>, Amy Stathos <amy.stathos(a)icann.org>, "Boelter, Jessica C.K." <jboelter(a)sidley.com>, "Fuller, Miles" <wfuller(a)sidley.com>, "Tam, Tennie H." <tennie.tam(a)sidley.com> >> Objet: [bylaws-coord] DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS - 2 April 2016 version >> Répondre à: John Jeffrey <john.jeffrey(a)icann.org> >> >> Dear Bylaws Coordination Group, >> >> Please find attached a document – DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS (vers. 2Apr) (“DRAFT BYLAWS”) for your review and discussion. As you will recall the last full draft was provided to you on 18 March, with the promise to provide another full turn of the DRAFT BYLAWS for your review today on 2 April. The DRAFT BYLAWS attached is the current working draft among the legal drafting group. There is also an Issue List attached, which are a set of additional questions and clarifications requested from the Bylaws Coordination Group. >> >> We ask that you share the attachments with your CCWG, ICG and CWG colleagues who will be reviewing this during this critical work week >> >> >> Recent Work – During the past two weeks the legal drafting group, made up of Sidley’s team, Adler’s team and ICANN's Legal team reviewed and worked through mark ups and redrafts of the various sections of new ICANN Bylaws. Also, we have held four separate meetings with the Bylaws Coordination Group during this two-week period asking questions and incorporating that feedback into the new draft. There is likely to be the need for some additional discussions as we work toward a public comment version of the new ICANN bylaws. >> >> >> More Work to Do – There is still work to do on the DRAFT BYLAWS, in identifying and working through any remaining provisions in the draft that are not clear, finding any remaining open issues, improving the provisions, and polishing the draft before publication for public comment. The legal teams remain engaged in review mode and are available for questions and comments during this period. >> >> >> Legal Teams have not yet “certified” – Since a) the Bylaws Coordination Group, CWG and CCWG have not yet reviewed and reacted to these DRAFT BYLAWS, b) there are still remaining open issues, and c) there is still review and polishing to be done by the legal teams – the legal teams have not indicated yet that the current DRAFT BYLAWS fully meets the recommendations within the Proposals. >> >> >> As we have indicated above there is still work to be done, including receiving the feedback from those reviewing these DRAFT BYLAWS this week before the legal teams will be in a position to certify the posting version for Public Comment >> >> >> Next Steps – >> >> >> 1) Now until 13 April – members of CCWG, CWG, Bylaws Coordination Group, Board and ICG to complete review of these DRAFT BYLAWS and provide feedback to legal teams; >> >> >> 2) Now until 18 April, (with particular focus during week of 13-18 April) – legal teams to update DRAFT BYLAWS working in coordination with the Bylaws Drafting Group; >> >> >> 3) 20 April – posting date for public comment period for new proposed bylaws – with legal teams supporting that the new proposed bylaws meets the proposal recommendations. >> >> >> ——— >> >> As before, we look forward to working with all of you in the coming days, to get ICANN’s Bylaws in the best form possible to effectuate these important changes. >> >> >> We hope these views of the documents are useful and that you receive them in the spirit that they are offered… to help all of us to be able to collaborate and work through these Bylaws changes in the most effective way possible — to enable the creation of a new and stronger, community empowered ICANN. >> >> John Jeffrey, Holly Gregory, and Rosemary Fei >> >> >> > > > > >> _____________________ >> ____________________ >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bylaws-coord mailing list >> bylaws-coord(a)icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bylaws-coord > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

8 10

Wrap up from Bylaws call
by Grace Abuhamad April 10, 2016

April 10, 2016

Hi all, Our call ended a bit abruptly due to a technical issue with the phone line. Lise has asked me to send a recap note with documents. Recap of CWG-Stewardship Bylaws Review - 4 April 2016 @ 18:00 UTC We have 9 days left to review the draft Bylaws in keeping with the overall timeline for the transition. Sharon Flanagan from Sidley provided a thorough overview of the areas of interest to the CWG bylaws to focus on (PTI, CSC, IFR), and the outstanding issues for clarification. She noted that escalation processes will be included in PTI-ICANN contract, and that the CSC Charter is a separate document per the CWG-Stewardship prior request. Following the presentation from Sharon, Lise asked for the three key DT leads (Donna for CSC, Chuck for Budget and Escalation; Avri for Reviews and Separation Process) to take the charge on responding to the issues for clarification list and reading through the relevant sections of the draft bylaws text. A proposed set of responses is to be provided to the CWG-Stewardship via the mailing list no later than Friday 8 April. In the meantime, all are welcome (and encouraged) to review and provide responses on the mailing list. There were some questions about PTI funding and budget. These will be addressed by DT-O on their calls this Tuesday and Thursday. More documents! The draft bylaws were released for 10-day community review on Sunday 3 April. Along with the bylaws draft, there was a document with a list of questions and clarifications to address. These documents are attached in PDF and Word formats and named: “Draft New ICANN Bylaws” "Issues for Bylaws Coordination Group” Since the release of these documents, the legal teams have provided redline comparisons of the old vs. new bylaws. Sharon provided a CWG-specific one to share with the group. These documents are: "Redline – April 2 Draft Bylaws compared to Current Bylaws” "CWG Bylaws Redline” To assist the DT-leads with their response drafting, I have prepared a template similar to the one we used in the first review of the bylaws (Nov 2015 – March 2016). This is the bare-bones version to kick-start the work. We can fill out more of the table as responses come in. “Responses to Bylaws Coordination Group – 4 April" More calls! In addition to the CWG-Stewardship-specific calls, if you are interested in the CCWG-Accountability bylaws, please join the CCWG-Accountability’s calls. The adobe room for the CCWG-Accountability calls is open to observers: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability/. The calls are scheduled for: 5 April at 19:00 UTC 7 April at 12:00 UTC Finally, we expect that Jonathan will be available to lead a 2nd CWG-Stewardship Bylaws Review call on Monday 11 April from 15:00 – 16:30 UTC. Once we confirm his availability, we will confirm the call and send calendar invitations out. This is important work! This is the final stretch. The CWG-Stewardship has been active for 547 days, and has made lots of impactful decisions on the future of the IANA Stewardship. The next few days are the ones where you can play a role the engraining those decisions. It’s a unique opportunity. Let’s do this! — Grace -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE.

4 4

Please review for Monday: Responses to Bylaws Coordination Group
by Grace Abuhamad April 9, 2016

April 9, 2016

Dear all, Please see attached the compiled set of responses from our DT leads. Please review these responses in time for the call on Monday at 15:00 UTC. For reference the Bylaws document and original list of questions are also attached. Seun had commented on Avri’s document, so I included his comments in this document as well. Thank you Avri (and Matt), Donna, and Chuck for your efforts to get the responses drafted by Friday! Best, Grace -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE.

2 1

ICANN and Verisign Announce Start of 90-day Root Zone Management System "Parallel Testing" Period
by Grace Abuhamad April 8, 2016

April 8, 2016

Original link: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-04-08-en ICANN and Verisign Announce Start of 90-day Root Zone Management System "Parallel Testing" Period As scheduled and previously communicated, on 6 April 2016, ICANN and Verisign began a 90-day “parallel testing” period to verify the continued integrity of the data contained in the root zone file produced via the Root Zone Management System (RZMS) following the successful completion of theIANA Stewardship Transition. This is a key step in ensuring the continued security and stability of the Internet’s root zone. The parallel testing period is part of the proposal that ICANN and Verisign submitted to NTIA in August 2015, at NTIA’s request, on how best to transition NTIA’s administrative role associated with root zone management to the global multistakeholder community in a manner that maintains the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet’s Domain Name System (DNS). The parallel testing period will be used to confirm that the production RZMS and the parallel test version of the RZMS (that has had the NTIA authorization step removed) produces identical output for every root zone file published. During the parallel testing period, and until the successful completion of the IANAStewardship Transition, the authoritative root zone file will continue to be produced by the production RZMS that contains the authorization step performed by NTIA. The parallel testing period is scheduled to be conducted for a continuous 90-day period and will be considered successful as long as no unexplained differences in root zone files are identified between the production RZMS and the parallel test RZMS. In the event that any unexplained differences are found the issue(s) will be addressed and the 90-day parallel testing period will be restarted. Verisign will be publishing daily comparison reports throughout the testing period, which will be made available on their website. ICANN will also be publishing monthly reports, which can be found onICANN’s Stewardship Implementation webpage. The RZMS parallel testing period is part of ICANN’s broader implementation planning efforts in response to the anticipated IANA Stewardship Transition. On 14 March 2014, NTIA announced its intent to transition its stewardship of the IANA functions to the multistakeholder community. The Root ZoneAdministrator (RZA) role currently performed by NTIA will be eliminated upon the successful completion of the IANA Stewardship Transition, currently projected for September 2016.

1 0

UPDATE: CWG-Stewardship Bylaws Review Meeting on Monday, 11 April
by Brenda Brewer April 8, 2016

April 8, 2016

Hello all, Please be sure to note Monday, 11 April CWG-Stewardship Bylaws Review Meeting has changed time to begin at 15:00 UTC. Calendar invites have been sent with this update. Thank you. Enjoy your weekend! Kind regards, Brenda

3 2

Notes, Recordings, Transcript DT-O Meeting on 7 April 2016
by Brenda Brewer April 7, 2016

April 7, 2016

Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the DT-O Meeting on 7 April 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/ti6AAw A copy of the notes and action item may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda [---] Action Item Action: Grace to transmit agreed Bylaw text to DT-O for approval, then to Jonathan and Lise once agreement in DT-O. Responses within 24h at most. Lise and Jonathan could confirm whether the text has legal's 'blessing'. Notes Agenda & Notes: Mary Uduma on audio only Cheryl to lead call in Chuck's absence. Outstanding actions from prior calls: * Xavier to provide clarifications on the DT-O budget draft * Elise/Xavier to discuss IANA Services Budget 1. Develop a process for development and approval of the IANA Services budget * Update from Xavier regarding meeting with Elise * Xavier and Elise intend to put together a document that sets out a process, timeline, and allows for a community review process. The draft will be high-level and can be refined later on. * Estimated timeframe: Xavier would like to have a draft that has been discussed with DT-O in time for Helsinki (June 2016) 2. Developing a Caretaker Budget * Update from Xavier regarding his ideas * Question for discussion: Should vetoing the PTI budget trigger both the PTI Caretaker Budget and the ICANN caretaker budget? * Next steps? 3. Financial Stability for PTI * Response from Sharon * Xavier's suggested next steps Text proposed by Sharon with edits from Greg: "To maintain ongoing operational excellence and financial stability of the IANA functions (so long as they are performed by ICANN or pursuant to contract with ICANN) and PTI, ICANN shall be required to plan for and allocate funds to the IANA functions and PTI, as applicable, that are sufficient to cover the future expenses and contingencies to ensure uninterrupted performance of those IANA functions and PTI in the future" Action: Grace to transmit agreed Bylaw text to DT-O for approval, then to Jonathan and Lise once agreement in DT-O. Responses within 24h at most. Lise and Jonathan could confirm whether the text has legal's 'blessing'. Next Meeting: * Wednesday 13 April at 20:00 UTC

1 0

Notes, Recordings, Transcript DT-O Meeting on 5 April 2016
by Brenda Brewer April 6, 2016

April 6, 2016

Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the DT-O Meeting on 5 April 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/sy6AAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda [---] Action Items Action: Chuck to send email to Client Committee (Greg, Lise, Maarten, Jonathan) to request legal advice. Action: Chuck to send the comments to Xavier for short term response before developing comments further. Notes 1. Roll call -- all in Adobe Connect room 2. Confirm agenda -- confirmed 3. Ensuring multi-year continuity of IANA Services funding * * Review of Bylaws language proposed by Sidley * Revised Bylaw: To maintain ongoing operational excellence and financial stability of the IANA functions (so long as they are performed by ICANN or pursuant to contract with ICANN), ICANN shall be required to plan for and fund sufficiently the future expenses and contingencies to ensure uninterrupted performance of those IANA functions. * In email to Sidley: Is it possible to capture the concept of multi-year funding? language around "allocation of funds" vs "fund"? Action: Chuck to send email to Client Committee (Greg, Lise, Maarten, Jonathan) to request legal advice. 4. Possible DT-O or CWG comments on the Draft FY17 ICANN Operating Plan & Budget -- Draft comments sent by Chuck on Sunday, April 3. Action: Chuck to send the comments to Xavier for short term response before developing comments further. 5. Develop a process for development and approval of the IANA Services budget -- tabled for next meeting 6. Developing a Caretaker Budget -- tabled for next meeting 7. AOB 8. Next meeting: Thursday, 7 April, 20:00 UTC (4 pm EDT, 1 pm PDT)

1 0

IOTF Call #4 - Meeting Notes (04 April 2016 @ 20:00 UTC)
by Yuko Green April 5, 2016

April 5, 2016

Dear members of the CWG Stewardship, Below, please find the meeting notes from the IOTF Call #4. The presentation material, audio and AC room recordings are now posted at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation under "Meetings & Work Sessions" section. The transcript will be made available soon. ********Meeting Notes******** Implementation Oversight Task Force (ITOF) call #4 04 April 2016 @ 20:00 UTC Please note that this meeting is being recorded. To mute or Unmute, select *6 (Star-Six) If you would like to review the last call(s), the recordings and presentation materials are posted publicly here: https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation Agenda: 1. Opening Remarks (Lise) 2. Implementation Items (Trang) a. PTI governance documents (Continued from Call #3) 3. Document Review Process & Timeline (Trang) 4. AOB (Lise) 5. Closing Remarks (Lise) Notes: - Avri Doria cannot attend today's call. - Chuck Gomes may miss some or all part of the call. 2.a. Implementation Items - PTI governance documents - PTI Conflict of Interest Policy had no objections from the attendees. - PTI Whistleblower Policy had no objections from the attendees except to note the implementation concern of anonymous reporting within such a small organization. 4. AOB - Cancel the Wednesday, 06 April 2016, IOTF call. ICANN to circulate the updated PTI governance document. - Issues with the IOTF mailing list where "Reply All" acts as "Reply" and drop the IOTF e-mail list depending on the e-mail client. We ask everybody to double check on "TO" section to ensure inclusion of IOTF mailing address. - IOTF Call Decision Log at the end of Appendix will be reviewed at the end of each call. Action Items: - Re-review and make necessary adjustments for PTI Bylaws based on the conversation and present back to IOTF (ICANN) - Circulate the updated PTI governance documents based on the previous calls in absence of the Wednesday call. (ICANN) Yuko Green Strategic Programs Manager Global Domains Division Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +1 310 578 8693 Mobile: +1 310 745 1517 E-mail: <mailto:yuko.green@icann.org> yuko.green(a)icann.org <http://www.icann.org/> www.icann.org

1 0

FW: [CCWG-ACCT] TR: Re: Implementation and Work Stream 2 role for CCWG-Accountability
by James Gannon April 4, 2016

April 4, 2016

Forwarding as requested. Copying DT-O leadership also. -James From: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> Date: Friday 1 April 2016 at 3:59 p.m. To: James Gannon <james(a)cyberinvasion.net<mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net>> Cc: Mathieu Weill <Mathieu.Weill(a)afnic.fr<mailto:Mathieu.Weill@afnic.fr>>, Thomas Rickert <rickert(a)anwaelte.de<mailto:rickert@anwaelte.de>>, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>>, CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] TR: Re: Implementation and Work Stream 2 role for CCWG-Accountability Dear James, Thank you No problem then I will copy my message to you as I am not in the mailing list of CWG Then I leave it to you to kindly forward my message to CWG QUOTING MY REQUEST for inclusion in the mailing list and participant list. We need to hear from each other and listen to each other. This is apparently a Multistakeholder process. Regards Kavouss See Below 2016-04-01 16:46 GMT+02:00 James Gannon <james(a)cyberinvasion.net<mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net>>: Im sorry Kavouss but the CCWG is not the place to debate the specifics of the IANA budget issues, the CWG and in particular Design Team O has been working tirelessly on this issue and have made their recommendations, as you know there are bylaws resulting out of not just CCWG work but also CWG work and I don’t really want to get the lines of responsibility for those two blurred. -james From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> Date: Friday 1 April 2016 at 3:36 p.m. To: Mathieu Weill <Mathieu.Weill(a)afnic.fr<mailto:Mathieu.Weill@afnic.fr>>, Thomas Rickert <rickert(a)anwaelte.de<mailto:rickert@anwaelte.de>>, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>> Cc: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] TR: Re: Implementation and Work Stream 2 role for CCWG-Accountability Dear Co-Chairs Dear CCWG Colleagues, Thank you very much for your kind message. I wish to remind you and the Lawyers that the Mission of Working Group to prepare ICANN revised Bylaws is merely and solely limited and restricted to translate the relevant parts of the CCWG Supplemental Proposal dated 23 February as approved by chattering organizations and then by ICANN Board and communicated to NTIA on 11 March 2016. In other words, those text appeared in that Report need to be translated into legal text with full authenticity and without ANY CHANGES WHAT SO EVER, Surprisingly, I have seen text distributed by Lawyers quoting new requirements e.g. from CWG for an equivalent amount of 3 years IANA budget as reserved budget for the implementation of PTI functions. While I do not have any difficulties to envisage a rescue budget for any rare and eventual circumstances that IANA financial resource face difficulties I have one basis and fundamental difficulties as follows CCWG has worked hardly during 14 months and gone through a very through analysis of all TEXTS WITHOUT ANY Exception and also gone through three public comments process and one supplemental process to finalize its proposal. That Proposal went through the approval process of Chartering Organizations and ICANN Board’s approval Consequently, any issue, no matter whether or not is relevant must be Seen and approved by the entire CCWG Published for public comments Approved by Chattering Organizations Approved by ICANN Board After the above-mentioned 5 steps are completed then relevant text may be included in the Draft Bylaws Having said that, I have no problem to raise the issues discussed by CWG in this regard and attaching their wishes to a CCWG Note TO BE SENT TO ICANN BOARD. ICANN Board could review the matter and make necessary provisions in their operational procedure such as opening a credit line labelled “IANA Budget Reserve” fed by ICANN with and annual equivalent amount of up to x% (NOT MORE THAN 10 5) in an accumulated manner to provide a rescue circumstances. However, this is an operational issue within the remit of the ICANN and has nothing to do with BYLAWS Regards KAVOUSS 2016-04-01 15:38 GMT+02:00 Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn(a)gmail.com<mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com>>: Dear Mathiew, The call is for new "participants" for the Implementation Team and WS2. This is not a call for Members of WS2 ? -- Sivasubramanian M<https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill(a)afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, Attached is a communication to the Chartering Organizations, sent a few minutes ago, confirming that we are proceeding with an implementation oversight role. Best Mathieu De : Mathieu Weill [mailto:weill@afnic.fr<mailto:weill@afnic.fr>] Envoyé : vendredi 1 avril 2016 12:38 À : 'James M. Bladel'; '‘Thomas Schneider''; 'Alan Greenberg'; 'Patrik Fältström'; 'Louie Lee'; oscar(a)lacnic.net<mailto:oscar@lacnic.net>; 'Katrina Sataki' Cc : 'Akram Atallah'; 'David Olive'; 'Steve Crocker'; 'Thomas Rickert'; 'gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>'; 'Tom Dale'; 'ACCT-Staff'; 'ICANN At-Large Staff'; 'Bart Boswinkel'; 'León Felipe Sánchez Ambía'; 'Jonathan Robinson'; 'Kimberly Carlson'; 'Olof Nordling'; 'Julie Hedlund'; 'Julia Charvolen'; 'Lise Fuhr'; 'Theresa Swinehart'; 'Carlos Reyes' Objet : Re: Implementation and Work Stream 2 role for CCWG-Accountability Dear Chartering Organizations, We are writing to you to follow up on our email from 6 March (available here<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2016-March/011…>), and provide an update on the Work Stream 1 implementation oversight and scoping for Work Stream 2. Hearing no objections from the Chartering Organizations, we have proceeded with an implementation oversight role to ensure that the implementation is consistent with the Work Stream 1 report. To date, this work has been focused on the drafting of Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation. There is a critical path for the Bylaws drafting, and along with the CWG-Stewardship co-Chairs, we have instructed our legal teams to work with ICANN to draft the Bylaws. It is expected that a final draft of the proposed revisions to the Bylaws would be available for CCWG review by 2 April at the latest. The CCWG has two calls scheduled to facilitate its review of the Bylaws. Following CCWG review, the Bylaws would be published for an open community-wide public comment period. It is important to remember that the overall transition schedule depends on completing this work. In order for the transition to take place by the end of the current contract between NTIA and ICANN on 30 September, ICANN must publish the Bylaws for a 30-day public comment period by 20 April, and the Board would need to approve the changes to the Bylaws by 27 May. Once the Bylaws work is complete, we will turn our focus to: · Completing the work on IRP that goes beyond the Bylaws · Finalizing the budget process in coordination with the CWG-Stewardship · Undertaking Work Stream 2 (WS2) You may have seen a call for WS2 volunteers on the ICANN website last week (available here<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-03-25-en>). We ask that you also share this call for volunteers widely to ensure that all interested parties, including those outside of the ICANN ecosystem, are aware that they are welcome to participate in projects of WS2. It is important for our group to continue to strive for maximized diversity of our participants going forward. We would like to emphasize that the CCWG-Accountability will remain open to anyone who wishes to join, and we will welcome informed individuals with relevant implementation and operational experience to join the CCWG-Accountability in this next phase. Finally, we are conscious of the heavy workload the CCWG-Accountability has been for your appointed members, and we would like to ask once more for Chartering Organizations to re-confirm member participation, and appoint new replacement members if necessary. Thank you, Leon Sanchez, Thomas Rickert, and Mathieu Weill CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

5 15

Fwd: [bylaws-coord] DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS - 2 April 2016 version
by Mathieu Weill April 3, 2016

April 3, 2016

Sharing to this group as well, on behalf of Lise Fuhr. Best, Mathieu Weill --------------- Depuis mon mobile, désolé pour le style Début du message transféré : > Expéditeur: Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill(a)afnic.fr> > Date: 3 avril 2016 14:16:21 UTC+2 > Destinataire: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> > Objet: TR : [bylaws-coord] DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS - 2 April 2016 version > Dear colleagues, > > In anticipation of our calls this week, please find below a note from the lawyers group, the draft bylaws as well as an issue list. > > It is important to read the lawyers notes as they quite efficiently describe the context and status of the work. Please review them for any process related question. > > The purpose of our calls this week will be to address the issue list questions (questions 1-7 & 25-34 are for the CCWG, the others for CWG). > > Should any other issue be added to the list based on your respective reviews, please raise your questions on the list for transparency. > > Best regards, > > Mathieu > --------------- > Depuis mon mobile, désolé pour le style > > Début du message transféré : > >> Expéditeur: John Jeffrey via bylaws-coord <bylaws-coord(a)icann.org> >> Date: 3 avril 2016 13:16:28 UTC+2 >> Destinataire: bylaws-coord(a)icann.org >> Cc: "Flanagan, Sharon" <sflanagan(a)sidley.com>, "Cc: Zagorin, Janet S." <jzagorin(a)sidley.com>, "Hilton, Tyler" <thilton(a)sidley.com>, ICANN-Adler <ICANN(a)adlercolvin.com>, "Hofheimer, Joshua T." <jhofheimer(a)sidley.com>, "Mohan, Vivek" <vivek.mohan(a)sidley.com>, "Clark, Michael A." <mclark(a)sidley.com>, "Boucher, Rick" <rboucher(a)sidley.com>, Sidley ICANN CCWG <sidleyicannccwg(a)sidley.com>, "Kerry, Cameron" <ckerry(a)sidley.com>, "McNicholas, Edward R." <emcnicholas(a)sidley.com>, Daniel Halloran <daniel.halloran(a)icann.org>, Amy Stathos <amy.stathos(a)icann.org>, "Boelter, Jessica C.K." <jboelter(a)sidley.com>, "Fuller, Miles" <wfuller(a)sidley.com>, "Tam, Tennie H." <tennie.tam(a)sidley.com> >> Objet: [bylaws-coord] DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS - 2 April 2016 version >> Répondre à: John Jeffrey <john.jeffrey(a)icann.org> >> Dear Bylaws Coordination Group, >> >> Please find attached a document – DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS (vers. 2Apr) (“DRAFT BYLAWS”) for your review and discussion. As you will recall the last full draft was provided to you on 18 March, with the promise to provide another full turn of the DRAFT BYLAWS for your review today on 2 April. The DRAFT BYLAWS attached is the current working draft among the legal drafting group. There is also an Issue List attached, which are a set of additional questions and clarifications requested from the Bylaws Coordination Group. >> >> We ask that you share the attachments with your CCWG, ICG and CWG colleagues who will be reviewing this during this critical work week >> >> >> Recent Work – During the past two weeks the legal drafting group, made up of Sidley’s team, Adler’s team and ICANN's Legal team reviewed and worked through mark ups and redrafts of the various sections of new ICANN Bylaws. Also, we have held four separate meetings with the Bylaws Coordination Group during this two-week period asking questions and incorporating that feedback into the new draft. There is likely to be the need for some additional discussions as we work toward a public comment version of the new ICANN bylaws. >> >> >> More Work to Do – There is still work to do on the DRAFT BYLAWS, in identifying and working through any remaining provisions in the draft that are not clear, finding any remaining open issues, improving the provisions, and polishing the draft before publication for public comment. The legal teams remain engaged in review mode and are available for questions and comments during this period. >> >> >> Legal Teams have not yet “certified” – Since a) the Bylaws Coordination Group, CWG and CCWG have not yet reviewed and reacted to these DRAFT BYLAWS, b) there are still remaining open issues, and c) there is still review and polishing to be done by the legal teams – the legal teams have not indicated yet that the current DRAFT BYLAWS fully meets the recommendations within the Proposals. >> >> >> As we have indicated above there is still work to be done, including receiving the feedback from those reviewing these DRAFT BYLAWS this week before the legal teams will be in a position to certify the posting version for Public Comment >> >> >> Next Steps – >> >> >> 1) Now until 13 April – members of CCWG, CWG, Bylaws Coordination Group, Board and ICG to complete review of these DRAFT BYLAWS and provide feedback to legal teams; >> >> >> 2) Now until 18 April, (with particular focus during week of 13-18 April) – legal teams to update DRAFT BYLAWS working in coordination with the Bylaws Drafting Group; >> >> >> 3) 20 April – posting date for public comment period for new proposed bylaws – with legal teams supporting that the new proposed bylaws meets the proposal recommendations. >> >> >> ——— >> >> As before, we look forward to working with all of you in the coming days, to get ICANN’s Bylaws in the best form possible to effectuate these important changes. >> >> >> We hope these views of the documents are useful and that you receive them in the spirit that they are offered… to help all of us to be able to collaborate and work through these Bylaws changes in the most effective way possible — to enable the creation of a new and stronger, community empowered ICANN. >> >> John Jeffrey, Holly Gregory, and Rosemary Fei >> > > >> _____________________ >> ____________________ >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bylaws-coord mailing list >> bylaws-coord(a)icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bylaws-coord

2 1

Important: Special CWG Bylaws Review call on Monday 4 April from 18:00 – 19:30 UTC
by Grace Abuhamad April 1, 2016

April 1, 2016

Dear all, As discussed on the CWG-Stewardship call yesterday, the draft bylaws are expected to be released for 10-day community review on Saturday 2 April. In keeping with these deadlines, we are scheduling a special CWG-Stewardship Bylaws Review call on Monday 4 April from 18:00 – 19:30 UTC. The timing of the call was determined by the availability of the briefing team, which includes Sharon Flanagan from Sidley Austin, Greg Shatan, Maarten Simon, and our co-chair Lise Fuhr. You will receive a calendar invite from Brenda shortly. The proposed agenda for the meeting is as follows: Opening remarks Presentation and discussion of CWG related ICANN bylaws AOB Closing remarks In addition to the CWG-Stewardship-specific calls, if you are interested in the CCWG-Accountability bylaws, please join the CCWG-Accountability’s calls. The adobe room for the CCWG-Accountability calls is open to observers: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability/. The calls are scheduled for: 5 April at 19:00 UTC 7 April at 12:00 UTC Finally, we expect that Jonathan will be available to lead a 2nd CWG-Stewardship Bylaws Review call on Monday 11 April from 15:00 – 16:30 UTC. Once we confirm his availability and the availability of the briefing team, we will confirm the call and send calendar invitations out. Talk to you on Monday. We will circulate the draft Bylaws as soon as they released. Best, Grace -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE.

1 0

Notes, Recordings, Transcript DT-O Meeting on 1 April 2016
by Brenda Brewer April 1, 2016

April 1, 2016

Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the DT-O Meeting on 01 April 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/sC6AAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda [---] Action Items * ACTION: Chuck will do a first draft of comments on FY17 Op Plan and budget by Monday 4 April. * ACTION: All to review Chuck's draft and discuss on calls on Tuesday and Thursday next week. * ACTION: Trang to follow up with Elise / Xavier regarding IANA Services budget Notes Status updates: * PTI Financial Objectives --> awaiting CWG-Stewardship approval * Recommendation for multi-year IANA Services funding --> awaiting CWG-Stewardship approval Comments on FY17 ICANN Operating Plan and Budget * Cheryl is ok with comments, but doesn't think they need to be heavyweight * Comments could be prepared for CWG consideration. Question of how/who would submit the comments * Aim for draft to be complete by Friday 8 April * Comments need to be ready to send to CWG by 11 April (in time for 14 April call) ACTION: Chuck will do a first draft of comments on FY17 Op Plan and budget by Monday 4 April. ACTION: All to review Chuck's draft and discuss on calls on Tuesday and Thursday next week. Process for IANA Services Budget * Awaiting feedback from Elise or Xavier * Expected diffrences: timing (needs to be done in advance of the regular budget) ACTION: Trang to follow up with Elise / Xavier regarding IANA Services budget Developing a Caretaker Budget * Awaiting feedback from Xavier (on vacation this week) * Will be coming back to this topic Next calls: * Tuesday 21:00 UTC * Thursday 20:00 UTC

1 0

Issues for the CWG Stewardship to review
by Lise Fuhr April 1, 2016

April 1, 2016

Dear all, At our meeting yesterday, we discussed the three key items listed below. In order to give all participants in the CWG-Stewardship the possibility to review and respond we send the issues to the CWG Stewardship list. We need to provide a CWG-Stewardship response on these issues quickly, so that the implementation work can proceed. The deadline for your review is Monday 4 April at 0800 UTC. Please review the following item and provide comments to the list if you have concerns or objections: 1. The proposed financial objectives for the PTI Budget (developed by DT-O) The draft text is as follows: “The financial objectives of PTI are to provide financial stability and operational excellence. Financial stability is defined as sufficient funding of PTI so as to avoid any kind of negative impact on the IANA Functions as a result of changes to ICANN’s financial situation. It furthermore is intended to capture the notion of secured funding for PTI that goes beyond one fiscal year. The objective of operational excellence means that there are sufficient funds budgeted and available to ensure that PTI is able to deliver operational excellence as defined by Service Level Expectations/Service Level Agreements approved by each of the three operational communities for their respective IANA services.” 2. The recommendation to ensure that the PTI Budget guarantees multi-year funding DT-O is of the view that there should be a statement in the Bylaws guaranteeing multi-year funding for PTI as part of financial stability. DT-O communicated this to Becky Burr who was involved in the Bylaw drafting, noting that the CWG-Stewardship had not agreed to it yet. In order for this to be incorporated into the Bylaws, the CWG-Stewardship needs to finalize its position on the issue. There was support on the CWG-Stewardship call to adopt the DT-O recommendation, but a review period was sent for any further comments. The proposed Bylaw language suggested by DT-O is as follows: "To respect the operational and financial autonomy of the IANA/PTI service to the community, the Board of ICANN shall provide an arms-length mechanism for the management board of PTI to be able to undertake the independent financial administration and accountability of PTI by ensuring a dedicated rolling three year reserve for future expenses and contingencies reasonably related to the legitimate activities of PTI." 3. Do you support Jonathan and Lise serving as interim PTI Board Directors (assuming there are no issues identified with regard to conflicts and independence)? On the IOTF calls, and as presented during the staff implementation update yesterday, there is a suggestion for Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI Board Directors until the PTI Board can be fully established. They would serve as interim directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence. For the PTI Board formal selections, NomCom will be the appointing body and selection criteria will be provided by the CSC once established. The appointment of interim directors will allow the implementation timeline to stay on track: establishing PTI, CSC and other structures as described in the IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal. Please be aware of the deadline Monday 4 April 0800 UTC If you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact Lise Fuhr. Thank you, Jonathan Robinson and Lise Fuhr

1 0

Meeting Notes from IOTF Call #3 (30 March 2016)
by Yuko Green April 1, 2016

April 1, 2016

Dear members of the CWG Stewardship, Below, please find the meeting notes from the IOTF Call #3. The presentation material, audio and AC room recordings are now posted at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation under "Meetings & Work Sessions" section. The transcript will be made available soon. ********Meeting Notes******** Implementation Oversight Task Force (ITOF) call #3 30 MARCH 2016@ 8pmUTC Please note that this meeting is being recorded. To mute or Unmute, select *6 (Star-Six) If you would like to review the last call(s), the recordings and presentation materials are posted publicly here: https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation Agenda: 1.Opening Remarks (Lise) 2.Implementation Items (Trang) a. CSC Charter (Continued from Call #2) b. RZERC Charter c. PTI governance documents d. Document Review Process & Timeline (Trang) 3.AOB (Lise) a. multi-year funding of PTI 4.Closing Remarks (Lise) Notes: 1.Opening Remarks (Lise) - Note taking will be kept for actions, decisions, and questions, Transcriptions will be made available shortly after the call. 2.a. Implementation Items - CSC Charter - Donna Austin from DT-C lead will take the lead on CSC charter work. The work will be brought back to CWG for review. AOB - Due to time constraint, we will skip the remaining item 2.c. Action Items: - Re-review the RZERC charter high level description based on today's call and determine what should go under operational procedure document and bring up to the next IOTF call. (ICANN) - Re-review the PTI purpose and bring it back to the IOTF (ICANN) - Re-review the document review process & timeline based on today's call and present back to IOTF (ICANN) Yuko Green Strategic Programs Manager Global Domains Division Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +1 310 578 8693 Mobile: +1 310 745 1517 E-mail: <mailto:yuko.green@icann.org> yuko.green(a)icann.org <http://www.icann.org/> www.icann.org

1 0