Chuck, your understanding is correct.

 

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Monday, 20 April 2015 4:49 PM
To: Martin Boyle; lisefuhrforwader; cwg-stewardship@icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Structure and comments from Sidley Austin - Periodic Reviews

 

If I understand the latest charter of the CSC, it would not trigger reviews but would instead escalate to the ccNSO or GNSO.  Is my understanding incorrect?

 

Chuck

 

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Boyle
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 1:35 PM
To: lisefuhrforwader; cwg-stewardship@icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Structure and comments from Sidley Austin - Periodic Reviews

 

Reviewing the text with edits from Sidley I saw on pp48-9 (What should trigger reviews? In annex D) that “although a super-majority of the CSC may also be able trigger an “off-cycle” Periodic Review Function if necessary to ensure satisfactory performance.”  Given the small number of members proposed for the CSC, I am not sure this is meaningful!  The DT-C work suggested an escalation to the ccNSO and GNSO for a decision – which would not be unreasonable given their role in organising the periodic reviews) – and a supermajority of the relevant councils makes a lot more sense.

 

Martin

 

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr
Sent: 20 April 2015 13:50
To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Structure and comments from Sidley Austin

 

Dear All,

 

Please be aware of the following documents from Sidley Austin.

 

1.      The structural model diagram

2.      Summary of Legal Structure

3.      CWG - Draft Transition Proposal (Sidley Comments)

 

Best regards,

Lise

 

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