Hi Paul, I just sent our review to the CCWG proposal to the CCWG group. There has been a three responses to the budget issues but none yet to the separation power. The three responses were not in contradiction to each other so we passed them on to the CCWG. Regarding the separation power - this will be having a second reading within the CCWG tomorrow and we will have a possibility to review this afterwards. We will also discuss the CCWG and our review at the call tomorrow. Best, Lise -----Original Message----- From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of James Gannon Sent: 20 January 2016 20:24 To: Paul M Kane - CWG; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG discussion For context some of this may be due to the incredible workload the CCWG is under at the moment and with the large amount of overlap people may have concentrated on that workload. -jg On 20/01/2016, 6:14 p.m., "cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Paul M Kane - CWG" <cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org on behalf of paul.kane-cwg@icb.co.uk> wrote:
At our last call it was decided we would have on-line discussion in advance of our next call ... this list has been silent.
We have a call scheduled for tomorrow - what is the plan?
Best
Paul
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship