June 2016 - CWG-Stewardship

IANA IPR
by Jonathan Robinson June 22, 2016

June 22, 2016

All, The IANA IPR group (Greg Shatan, Lise Fuhr & myself) from the CWG had a meeting with colleagues from the other two IANA operational communities. Greg & I attended. Lise was unable to but we have discussed it since. We picked up on the relatively recently Sidley advice and considered the issues arising and next steps. Essentially, we agreed on at least the following actions: 1. The key questions and issues arising from the Sidley review of the Principal Terms need to be organised, reviewed and dealt with. CWG Stewardship (Names) will tabulate these for ease of processing. Issues needing resolution by CWG only will be dealt with by CWG. Issues needing resolution by all three operations communities will be referred back to the IANA IPR group. 2. We will utilise ICANN project management staff to track the key issues and integrate this (IANA IPR) stream of work into the overall project tracking and reporting. 3. It will be useful to meet face to face in Helsinki if possible. 4. Draft agreements for three licences of the IPR are being prepared by IETF Trust legal counsel. These will be sent this group for review once drafted. Now, the Sidley input does not immediately give us in the CWG the ability to move forward without reviewing it properly and agreeing the actions required. Accordingly, we propose to take two actions within the CWG in the short term. A. Tabulate the advice given and commence drafting answers or responses to the questions / issues raised B. Client Committee meet with Sidley (after ICANN Helsinki) to discuss the input and seek to reconcile it with the views and positions shared by the other operational communities. Please indicate if you have any concerns with this approach. Thank-you, Jonathan

2 3

Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update
by Xavier J. Calvez June 22, 2016

June 22, 2016

Dear Brett, Thank you for your interest and question. We currently publish the list of all vendors from whom ICANN obtain services in relation to the IANA Stewardship transition. The $$ value of the services received is aggregated by category of expenses, which you mention below (US Government affairs, Education/engagement/advice,…). This presentation is driven by 2 factors: providing clarity as to the type of services received, and abiding by the contractual obligation of confidentiality in force with each of the vendors (resulting from standard business sensitive information). We do publish however the detail of the legal advice, by firm and by working group, on this same page (see for example the link to the report of fees by firm: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-legal…) You will also find more information relative to ICANN’s lobbying in the following blog published a few months ago. In this blog, you will also find links to the disclosure reports that ICANN makes on lobbying activities. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/lobbying-disclosures-contributions-20…. Lastly, further information on lobbying appears in ICANN’s form 990 (Schedule C, Part II-B. On page 33/73 of the FY15 form 990 published at the following link): https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/fy-2015-form-990-10may16-en.pdf I hope this helps. Please let me know if you have further questions. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 From: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org> Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:54 PM To: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org>, "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org>, "icann-board(a)icann.org" <icann-board(a)icann.org>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Xavier, Thank you. Could you please provide a more detailed breakdown of legal advice, US government affairs, and educations/engagement/advice? In each category, there are multiple firms/vendors listed (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-profe…) I would appreciate the amount provided to each individual vendor. If it is provided somewhere, I would appreciate you letting me know where to find it. Much appreciated, Brett ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Xavier J. Calvez Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 12:10 AM To: community-finance(a)icann.org; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; CCWG-Accountability Cc: Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org; Finance Staff Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Dear all, You find at the link below the updated project’s expenses as of FY16 Q3 (from July 2014 to March 2016). As indicated a few months ago, we have added new detailed information on the staff support with the individual positions, names and percentages of effort over the period. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-project-costs Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348

1 1

IOTF Call #13 - Meeting Notes (20 June 2016 @ 19:00 UTC)
by Yuko Green June 21, 2016

June 21, 2016

Dear members of the CWG Stewardship, Below, please find the meeting notes from the IOTF Call #10. The presentation material, AC room and audio recordings are posted at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation under "Meetings & Work Sessions" section. The transcript will be made available within the next few days. *** Meeting Notes *** Implementation Oversight Task Force (ITOF) call #13 20 June 2016 @ 19:00 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 2. Implementation Items PTI Staffing 3. AOB Helsinki implementation update session Work plan to finalize PTI formation documents and ICANN-PTI contracts Decision Log 4. Closing Remarks Action Items: - Provide the revised PTI staffing plan (ICANN) - Include the IANA staff's job descriptions within the revised PTI staffing plan (ICANN) - Book the room for Thursday 12:30-1:30 in Helsinki - Connect with Jonathan and Lise to finalize the work plan and decide the way forward for review with Sidley and CWG (Trang) - Share the draft project plan for IANA IPR (ICANN) ***Chat History*** Yuko Green: Hello everybody! Welcome to IOTF Call #13! Yuko Green: We'll get started shortly Yuko Green: Who may be the phone number 1108? James Gannon: I think one of they key things to bring back to the IANA staff is that we want them to be happy also, while maksing sure we get the proposal implemented, and want to come to an arrangement that works for everyone involved. We really dont want this to be a US vs IANA staff situation. Chuck: Thanks Akram. Any idea how long it will take to provide the details of the proposed revised staffing plan for PTI? Jonathan Robinson: @Akram. Thank-you. Just want to be 100% clear so we can communicate effectively if / when others ask James Gannon: Agreed! James Gannon: As an affiliate yes based on my experience of working for a US affiliate Donna Austin: @Akram--can you provide information about staff the currently perform the IANA function? Not necessarily names, but job desciptions? Greg Shatan: This sounds like very good progress indeed. Chuck: Great Akram & Trang. Thanks. Donna Austin: Thanks Akram Yuko Green: Who may be the phone number 5215? Jonathan Robinson: @Akram. Good point on the responsibility of the PTI Board to assist. Donna Austin: Yuko, 5215 is me, Donna Yuko Green: Thank you Donna James Gannon: If needed I can do Thursday Chuck: I had booked something at lunch on Thursday but may be able to switch it to Monday; I had left Monday for the IOTF meeting. Lise Fuhr: @Trang I am not there Thursday Jonathan Robinson: Happy to particpate and provide some introductory remarks, possibly together with Lise. Lise Fuhr: Why did we change from Monday Chuck: Will the time be 12:30-1 pm on Thursday? Chuck: Thanks. Chuck: I made a mistake: 12:30-1:30 . Donna Austin: It's 12.30 to 1.30 James Gannon: What was the date for the sharing of the name of PTI? Alan Greenberg: My mistake. I will attend FIRST part of IOTF and then leave. Alissa Cooper: I still am concerned that the contracts will be out for public comment at the time when the decision needs to be made about the contract being extended or not. Alissa Cooper: Rather than having the public comment periods already concluded. James Gannon: Ok thanks Trang Alissa Cooper: But I realize I may be the only person worried about that. Alissa Cooper: Thanks for the explanation, very helpful. Russ Housley: What is the timeline for IANA IPR? Russ Housley: that is the only row that is completely blank... Jonathan Robinson: @Russ. We ahve a call planned to discuss betweent the three operational communites soon. Jonathan Robinson: All. I need to leave the call @ 45 mins past the hour. Apologies. Russ Housley: I'm aware of that call, but it is unclear to me when that will come to the IOTF and CWG James Gannon: We really need that soon right? Lise Fuhr: @Russ that can be discussed at the next IPR call Russ Housley: My understanding is that high-level principles are agreed, but the details are still being discussed Jonathan Robinson: I do think that it will be helpful to ahve a project plan for IPR (however draft) to indicate the key steps in the process and initial estimates of time Jonathan Robinson: It may help to focus all on the path ahead. Russ Housley: @Jonathan Yes, that would be very helpful so that everyone knows the milestones Jonathan Robinson: @Russ. Agreed. Hopefully ICANN staff can help with providing their understanding of the key steps / mielsotnes. Russ Housley: @Greg That lines up with my understanding of the current status on IPR Greg Shatan: Thanks, @Russ. James Gannon: I wouldnt be able to make it Chuck: After Helsinki Lise Fuhr: A week after please James Gannon: Thanks all Chuck: Thanks Trang James Gannon: See you all in Finland Lise Fuhr: Bye Yuko Green: Thank you! Greg Shatan: See you in HEL! Regards, 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

IANA Stewardship Transition
by Christopher Wilkinson June 20, 2016

June 20, 2016

Dear Friends and Colleagues: Allow me to make a few comments. I trust that the opportunity may arise to discuss further in Helsinki. The fact that PTI 'separability' encounters employment policy issues is neither a surprise nor unexpected. Abstracting from my own earlier warning about that aspect, should counsel have spent as much time on employment law as they did on IPR law, then we might not be in the present predicament. The professional assets of the staff are more important than a few domain names and trademarks. Although we come to this from quite different perspectives, I find myself in broad agreement with Kurt. I defer to, and respect, his experience as a senior manager of a Californian corporation, including the employment policy aspects that those responsibilities must have entailed. Chuck asked me to specify where I disagreed with Greg. Thus, as I see it, Greg expects that separation is a real and current prospect in the short term. I consider that to be false. I think that it is an asymptotic extreme case that will never be reached. (a) long before the ICANN & PTI model would have 'failed' (not my word), other interests and authorities would have intervened, definitively. There is no question of any particular sub-set of the ICANN community ever taking over the IANA functions, nor part of them, through separation. (b) we should all realise that far beyond the CWG and CCWG mailing lists there is a very large community of users who are greater than the scope of the ICANN community and of our working groups, who would be utterly shocked if they were ever to find that the Internet infrastructure had been destabilised by the actions of those whose primary responsibility is to ensure the opposite. (c) long ago, governments realised that the management of the unique Internet root was critical to their economic, political and social interests in the stability of the global Internet. Consequently, in the event of separation – which I do not expect – I am quite sure that the Governments and the other AC's would 'follow the root'. Thus, as I have already pointed out, the idea that PTI would not have AC's is unrealistic. PTI draft bylaws refer. Jurisdiction: I think it was Phil who asked me to explain my point of view, which is basically to take jurisdiction off the agenda until there are viable alternatives on the table. Meanwhile: (a) it is quite clear that the USA is not yet willing to contemplate a change of jurisdiction (b) most of the rest of the world does not support the US position; thus we confront an intrinsic element of instability in the global Internet in the long term. That which will have to be managed for the time being. As has already been the case. (c) I concur that there is apparently not yet a platform of international law that would permit and welcome the incorporation of an international multistakeholder entity such as ICANN. That will happen, but not yet. But let's be creative; in 1996 the ICANN formula itself would not have been credible. (Thankyou, Ira.) (d) Consequently, the idea that US Jurisdiction over ICANN should be entrenched in ICANN's 'Fundamental Bylaws' could very well be read, world-wide, as a provocation and give rise to reactions elsewhere that would not atall conform to the other – more important - objectives of the Transition. No. I trust that these comments help to clarify my point of view. I do not expect all of you to agree with them, and I hope that we may have an opportunity in Helsinki to move forward on some of these issues. May I say, however, that whatever is the WS2 interest in jurisdiction, the main, immediate, issue for WS2 is the transparent accountability of the representatives of the SO's and the AC's to their own constituencies and to the ICANN community as a whole. Regards CW

1 0

FY17 Budget update: Section 4 on IANA Stewardship
by Xavier J. Calvez June 20, 2016

June 20, 2016

Dear all, Please find attached an extract from the final FY17 Budget document relative to the IANA Stewardship transition (Section 4), currently under review, prior to Board consideration for approval in Helsinki. You may remember that the Draft budget document submitted for public comment did not include information on the FY17 expenses for this project. The Project Cost Support Team created in Marrakech has been working with the BFC, the CCWG, CWG, ICG co-chairs and involved staff to estimate the draft project’s expenses for FY17. These draft estimates have been included in the attached section (total $8.8m, page 3/10). Though offered late in the process, as these estimates are under review, your comments and questions on this section are welcome. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348

1 0

FY17 Budget update: Section 4 on IANA Stewardship
by Xavier J. Calvez June 20, 2016

June 20, 2016

Dear all, Please find attached an extract from the final FY17 Budget document relative to the IANA Stewardship transition (Section 4), currently under review, prior to Board consideration for approval in Helsinki. You may remember that the Draft budget document submitted for public comment did not include information on the FY17 expenses for this project. The Project Cost Support Team created in Marrakech has been working with the BFC, the CCWG, CWG, ICG co-chairs and involved staff to estimate the draft project’s expenses for FY17. These draft estimates have been included in the attached section (total $8.8m, page 3/10). Though offered late in the process, as these estimates are under review, your comments and questions on this section are welcome. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348

1 0

Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update
by Seun Ojedeji June 18, 2016

June 18, 2016

Ah okay thanks for clarifying the summary page as I was doing a grand total of the "total row" instead, good to know that is not the case. :-) As to the legal cost, attached is the file I downloaded from the relevant url (FY16 Q1 to Q3- legal summary by firm), where i saw some 2014 dates and which actually made me ask clarification. Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 18 Jun 2016 17:24, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> wrote: > Seun, > Thank you for checking the page. > The first cost summary slide indicates $23.3m total spend for the entire > project from July 2014 (inception of the tracking) to March 2016 (not $70m > as indicated in your email below). > The legal costs summary tables, in the Legal Advice Costs section, display > the costs only for FY16 (9 months from July 2015 to March 2016). The same > information for the preceding period (FY15, from July 2014 to June 2015), > appears in the section at the bottom called "Preciously published > information". > I hope that clarifies. Let me know if you have any other questions. > > > Thank you. > Best, > > Xavier > > On Jun 18, 2016, at 01:49, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > <Filtered addresses that I don't have posting rights to> > > Thanks for the share Xavier, from the cost summary over 70m has been > expended so far with over 40% going to legal.... Sign > > That said, the detail legal section reads 2016 Q1 to Q3 and it's content > totals 7m. I could not correlate that figure with that one in the summary, > also the content of the document has dates of 2014 in it, yet the document > title refers to 2016 Q1 to Q3. Could you kindly clarify this? > > Regards > > Sent from my LG G4 > Kindly excuse brevity and typos > > Dear all, > > You find at the link below the updated project’s expenses as of FY16 Q3 > (from July 2014 to March 2016). As indicated a few months ago, we have > added new detailed information on the staff support with the individual > positions, names and percentages of effort over the period. > > > > *https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-project-costs > <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-project-costs>* > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > Best, > > Xavier > > > > Xavier Calvez > > ICANN > > CFO > > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > > Los Angeles, CA 90094 > > Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 > > Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 > > Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community > >

1 0

IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update
by Xavier J. Calvez June 18, 2016

June 18, 2016

Dear all, You find at the link below the updated project’s expenses as of FY16 Q3 (from July 2014 to March 2016). As indicated a few months ago, we have added new detailed information on the staff support with the individual positions, names and percentages of effort over the period. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-project-costs Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348

2 2

IOTF Call #12 - Meeting Notes (15 June 2016 @ 20:00 UTC)
by Yuko Green June 16, 2016

June 16, 2016

Dear members of the CWG Stewardship, Below, please find the meeting notes from the IOTF Call #10. The presentation material, AC room and audio recordings are posted at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation under "Meetings & Work Sessions" section. The transcript will be made available within the next few days. *** Meeting Notes *** Implementation Oversight Task Force (ITOF) call #12 15 June 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 Remark 2. Implementation Items TI Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation: Chairs' response to Sidley's question PTI Staffing 3. AOB Helsinki implementation update session Work plan to finalize PTI formation documents and ICANN-PTI contracts Decision Log 4. Closing Remarks Decisions: PTI Bylaws & AoI table 5.2.3 closed 5.3.3 closed 5.11.3 closed 6.1 closed ***Chat History*** Yuko Green: Hello everybody, welcome to the IOTF call #12! Yuko Green: We will get started shortly. Yuko Green: The table is available at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rmsp569qRxkWtNSNrJsZzENxFKLwbXVcTDWSGZJE qcU/edit?usp=sharing Yuko Green: All - the comments could not fit into PDF, thus I encourage you to open up the Google Doc from above provided link. Grace Abuhamad: If there is no decision/agreement, could I move this suggestion to a comment rather than part of the draft response at this stage? matthew shears: if the PTI manager is the President I think it is desirable to have an independent chair Oscar Robles: I support that, unless there is strong support to keep it matthew shears: but soft option is fine - its a balancing act Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Yes we need not wordsmith here rather just ensure correect intent Greg Shatan: I am 211xxx6873 (dialed in while rebooting computer). I've been on for a few minutes. Grace Abuhamad: The text is as follows currently: Grace Abuhamad: Chairperson is required.Chairperson must be elected by the board.Chairperson must not be the PTI manager.Chairperson must be one of the NomCom / independent directors. There is a preference that the Chairperson be a NomCom-appointed director if possible. President may be PTI manager (must be PTI manager?). There is a preference is that neither the PTI president and chairperson be PTI staff (whether seconded from ICANN or not). Grace Abuhamad: oops - bad copy paste. One moment please Greg Shatan: ICANN only nominates 3. NomCom nominates the other two. Grace Abuhamad: Here is the correct existing text: Grace Abuhamad: Chairperson is required.Chairperson must be elected by the board.Chairperson must not be the PTI manager.There is a preference that the Chairperson be a NomCom-appointed director if possible. President may be PTI manager. There is a preference is that neither the PTI president and chairperson be PTI staff (whether seconded from ICANN or not). Trang Nguyen: Paragraph 1112: " The PTI Boardcould be comprised of three directors who are employed by ICANN or PTI (for example, theICANN Executive responsible for PTI, the ICANN CTO and the IANA Managing Director),and two additional independent directors. " Yuko Green: CWG Proposal states: "The PTI Boardcould be comprised of three directors who are employed by ICANN or PTI (for example, theICANN Executive responsible for PTI, the ICANN CTO and the IANA Managing Director),and two additional independent directors. The two additional directors must be nominatedusing an appropriately rigorous nomination mechanism (e.g. through the use of the ICANNNominating Committee)." Greg Shatan: That last preference contradicts the President being the PTI manager. Greg Shatan: ICANN appoints all 5 nominees. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Correct Greg matthew shears: agree - the issue is more one of balance between nom com appointed and PTI staff Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): yup Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Yes not Both Grace Abuhamad: Is the sentence correct now? "There is a preference is that both the PTI president and chairperson be PTI staff (whether seconded from ICANN or not)." Lise Fuhr: @Grace missing a not Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): nope Grace Grace Abuhamad: "here is a preference that both the PTI president and chairperson not be PTI staff (whether seconded from ICANN or not)." Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): YES matthew shears: yes Donna Austin 2: President = PTI Manager; Chaiirperson is elected by the Board, but must not be the President = PTI Manager. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Yes Chuck it is IMO Grace Abuhamad: I can type whichever you would like! It's not my text :) elise: I understand it the way Donna has said it. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Phew AAkram thanks I was looking for a 'headslap'ICON for a moment then Donna Austin 2: Would you have a circumstance where you would have a President and a PTI Manager? Donna Austin 2: that should be, where you would have a President and the PTI Manager on the Board of the PTI? Donna Austin 2: @Jonathan, and mine too. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): yup Greg Shatan: Chuck you are correct matthew shears: if PTI manager = President then yes, Chair should be indepedent Lise Fuhr: @Chuck yes Donna Austin 2: @Chuck, agree the Chair would be independent as the preferred option. Greg Shatan: This was all supposed to be so lightweight <sigh> Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): LOL matthew shears: yes, correct! Trang Nguyen: I think the 2 options are either the Chair is a NomCom nominated director, or the Chair is not the PTI President. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): I agree that was the assumption @Jonthan Chuck Gomes: Thanks Matthew. Lise Fuhr: Yes elise: Akram said - regardless of whether the presidnet is on the board or not - the chairmanship should not be held by the president elise: dictated by akram to elise Donna Austin 2: If the President is not the PTI Manager, who will be the President? One of the three appointments made by ICANN? Chuck Gomes: Once again we are not going to be able to finish the Bylaws. I think it is very important that we spend some time on the rationale document in this meeting. Greg Shatan: What is the job description of the President if they are not the PTI Manager? matthew shears: perhaps we should just say that the chair should be appointed by the nomcom matthew shears: that would leave the option of President being PTI manager and being on the Board Chuck Gomes: The best person for chair might not be a nom-com appointee. matthew shears: agree chuck - but this is PTI and there does need to be some degree of independence am ong the key roles Alissa Cooper: Not sure if it helps anyway, but you're talking about a board for an affiliate that is going to have a dozen employees who will be carrying out clerical functions. Might not be necessary to over-optimize given the likely responsibilities of this board. Back to lurking ... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): zudio? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Llow for review is OK Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Allow Grace Abuhamad: I will provide a redline version and clean version to the full IOTF and CWG groups in advance of CWG call Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Thx Grace Donna Austin 2: Thanks Chuck and I can confirm that this is the position of the RySG. Chuck Gomes: Let's figure out what we need to do to make secondment work and do it. Donna Austin 2: Sorry all, I have to drop for another call. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): bye Donna Lise Fuhr: Bye Donna Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): If and when is OK I heard New Staff Lise Fuhr: @Jonathan - correct Lise Fuhr: Sorry for confusion Lise Fuhr: Not hire new staff - but when hiring new staff then to PTI matthew shears: apologies have to drop off Avri Doria: my issue is with conflict of interest in the senior most person. Chuck Gomes: @ Lise: Would that hamper recruiting for new staff? Oscar Robles: yes, please Avri Doria: Chuck, i doubt it. if is a good place to work, people looking for a job will want to work there. Avri Doria: ( said as someone who is always looking for work ) Avri Doria: i think the class issue can be dealt with Avri Doria: i.e. treat all employees equally. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Yes Avri it shuld be abe to be Jonathan Robinson: Thanks Akram. Good to have you on the call. Lise Fuhr: Thank you bye all Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Bye everyone talk again *soon*... Jonathan Robinson: Sorry for my part in the overrun Avri Doria: good travels all who are travelling Regards, 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: IANA/PTI tentative budget process
by Grace Abuhamad June 16, 2016

June 16, 2016

Dear all – please see below an email from Xavier that was sent to the wrong address. Forwarding to all related lists considering relevance to the call earlier today. From: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 1:11 PM To: "dto-bounces(a)icann.org" <dto-bounces(a)icann.org>, Charles Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Cc: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org>, Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen(a)icann.org>, Elise Gerich <elise.gerich(a)icann.org>, Becky Nash <becky.nash(a)icann.org> Subject: IANA/PTI tentative budget process Dear Chuck and DT-O members, I realized a few days ago that I never sent the attached graph, depicting the tentative budget process that Elise and I had presented to you as a suggested approach to address the spirit and objective of the CWG proposal, rather than strictly reflecting the specific “9 months in advance” formulated in the proposal. There were discussions during the CWG today on the topic and I thought useful to send this to you now. Chuck, Let me know if you would like me to send this to the CWG or if you prefer sending it, maybe with an introductory note that explains how the DT-O sees this suggested approach? Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348

1 0