Hi,

If there is the understanding of the 2 points below:
- That there is supposed to be another process that handles the relationship between NTIA & the root zone maintainer (which is not within the scope of CWG)
- That the relationship between NTIA & IANA is what the CWG is supposed to look into transitioning (which is what most DTs is expected to address)

Then I don't think there would be need for DT-F

I hope we are not fragmenting these DTs beyond defragmentation.

Regards

sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.

On 16 Mar 2015 17:20, "Grace Abuhamad" <grace.abuhamad@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all, 

On our last call, on Thursday, we noted an action to make a call for a DT-F lead. This DT is listed as a Priority 1 DT, so we would like to identify a lead and a working group as soon as possible. 

As a reminder, here is an excerpt about DT-F from the Status document on the Wiki: 
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Design+Teams+List

 

Design Team F

Relationship between the NTIA, IANA and the Root Zone Maintainer

Lead

TBC

Status

Step 0, Priority 1 (Provisional)

Note

 


Best, 
Grace

_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship