Hi Christopher The context for calling out a TLD that is not a gTLD or a ccTLD was in response to the suggestion that if .arpa wanted to have representation on the CSC there was no avenue for this to happen despite them being a TLD. So you are correct, a TLD not considered a gTLD or ccTLD is largely the group you have identified. Not sure I understand what you mean by circumlocution, but the intention is to ensure that all direct customers of the IANA naming function had the opportunity to provide a representative on the CSC, rather than ensure that the USG-based TLDs, or the ICANN-based TLDs, would somehow have an 'extra' seat on the CSC. Apologies for not responding to your earlier email, I admit with all the traffic on the list I find it hard to keep up and I simply did not see it, but would agree that perhaps it would be prudent to reference the other TLDs that you have called out in the proposal. Thanks Donna From: CW Lists [mailto:lists@christopherwilkinson.eu] Sent: Thursday, 14 May 2015 9:50 AM To: Donna Austin; cwg-stewardship@icann.org IANA Subject: Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] Sidley punch list items considered by CSC Design Team Dear Donna, Dear Friends and Colleagues: With reference to the DT-C notes on the 'Punch List', attached, for which I thank you, allow me a short comment on Point 11: CSC Composition. The concept of a TLD that is not a ccTLD or a gTLD is rather obscure. Many would consider that there are none such. However, internal evidence suggests that CWG considers that there are some. In which case, to the best of my knowledge, the only candidates are .int, .gov, .edu and .mil. or .arpa, thus the DT-C comments under point 11, would appear to be a rather odd circumlocution, if the intention is to ensure that the USG-based TLDs, or the ICANN-based TLDs, would somehow have an 'extra' seat on the CSC. I drew this question to your attention in my mail, below, of 26 February, but did not receive a reply. Having reviewed in some detail the most recent version of the CWG transition proposal, I still find no reference to the above TLDs (with the exception of .int) Indeed, if it is the CWG position that these TLDs should be somehow 'grandfathered' outside the IANA transition, then may I suggest that it behoves someone - not excluding NTIA - to say so clearly, now. Otherwise there will be a lingering misunderstanding that would sit uncomfortably with the underlying proposition that the IANA transition is to the global multistakeholder Internet community. Regards CW Begin forwarded message: From: CW Lists <lists@christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:lists@christopherwilkinson.eu>> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Draft Proposal Version 2.0 Date: 26 Feb 2015 13:50:44 GMT+01:00 To: Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr@difo.dk<mailto:lise.fuhr@difo.dk>>, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Cc: "cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Stewardship" <cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>> Jonathan, Lise: Thankyou for another draft magnum opus. As you say there are several aspects to be completed in greater detail. Meanwhile, may I point out that under: I. The Community’s Use of the IANA - and indeed in the whole document, there is no reference to the TLDs: .gov, .mil, .edu and .arpa. These are not gTLDs, as the reference to .int confirms. For the sake of completeness, it would not be appropriate to ignore them. Regards CW Begin forwarded message: From: Donna Austin <Donna.Austin@ariservices.com<mailto:Donna.Austin@ariservices.com>> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Sidley punch list items considered by CSC Design Team Date: 13 May 2015 19:05:12 GMT+02:00 To: "cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>> Cc: "dt3@icann.org<mailto:dt3@icann.org>" <dt3@icann.org<mailto:dt3@icann.org>> All As noted on Tuesday’s call, DT-C had a call to address DT-C items on Sidley’s punch list. Attached are our comments. Happy to answer any questions. Thanks, Donna [cid:image001.png@01D08E34.9C38B4F0] DONNA AUSTIN Policy and Industry Affairs Manager ARI REGISTRY SERVICES Melbourne | Los Angeles P +1 310 890 9655 P +61 3 9866 3710 E donna.austin@ariservices.com<mailto:donna.austin@ariservices.com> W www.ariservices.com<http://www.ariservices.com/> Follow us on Twitter<https://twitter.com/ARIservices> The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately. _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
