Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Meeting # 64 on 02 September 2015 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/D5FCAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda Action Items Action: text should read e.g ICANN Board not i.e. ICANN board Action: adjust p.15, A4 so that it is consistent with the rest of the document (and on page 8) Action: circulate redline of those changes so that the document can be approved at next XWG meeting Action: finalize question of billing management at the next meeting. Action: refer Sidley to transcript and audio at this point of the meeting (about 1h into the call) so that they can incorporate the discussion on budget into their Public Comment drafting work. Action: Sidley to consider whether the scope of the enhanced IRP is adquate to cover PTI decisions. Notes 1. Opening remarks * Calls scheduled every two weeks * Since the last meeting, the Chairs have submitted a clarification on the IANA IPR issue (to the ICG). * SLEWG has done their work -- thank you! * Client Committee has met to discuss Bylaws and an update will be provided in #3 2. Review of SLEWG output * Thank you to SLEWG for really hard work! * After ratification, IANA staff will develop plan for testing and implementation (with NTIA approval since ICANN is still under contract) * Principles were approved by the CWG earlier in they year * Key point in "Assumptions": ensure that each element of IANA's work is measured Martin Boyle questions/review: * has concerns on the process to approve changes in new regime (p.8 and p.15) -- not clear where the responsibility for authorization lies "externally". Is the external party the ICANN Board or PTI Board or another? This is particularly important in the case of ccTLD delegations. * --> for gTLDs the ICANN Board is the external party. For ccTLDs, the situation is different: third party only confirms process is followed. * Second question is about emergency changes (p.17) -- what was this just as a note and did not appear in the table? * Status tracker reporting on p. 14 -- is this a general service that can be made available to all TLDs? Action: text should read e.g ICANN Board not i.e. ICANN board Action: adjust p.15, A4 so that it is consistent with the rest of the document (and on page 8) Action: circulate redline of those changes so that the document can be approved at next XWG meeting Next Steps: * Timing is of concern so Chairs will need to monitor testing & implementation * Proposal will not be re-submitted to the ICG since this work was known to be done following submission and based on principles that are in the proposal. * Formal ratification will occur at next CWG meeting. 3. Update on legal work * Client Committee has not met in a while (since 9 July), but met earlier this week to review current and potential future work * Sidley has produced a Bylaws matrix and is itimately versed with the work of the CWG and CCWG, so we'd like to request them to draft the Bylaws. * CCWG and CWG have different drafting processes: the CCWG has ICANN holding the pen on the first draft, while the CWG has Sildey holding the pen. * A coordination meeting will be held on Friday between the CWG,CCWG, Sidley and ICANN to commence work. * Sidley will track and report on whether the CWG requirements are being met, and continue to be met, by the CCWG work. * Did touch on the issue of financial control and management. Chairs have planned to follow up with ICANN on this. Sidley has requested that the detailed billing (not the overall billing) is kept confidential. The Client Committee has the option of seeing the billing confidentially, but needs authorization of the CWG to do so. Any comments? * Notes, recordings, transcripts from the meeting are posted here: <https://community.icann.org/x/MoBCAw> https://community.icann.org/x/MoBCAw. Action: finalize question of billing management at the next meeting. 4. Update on CCWG-Accountability related issues IANA Functions budget: * is this subject to a veto or approval? Our intention was to have one or the other, and the CCWG has proposed the veto option. Confirming that this "veto" meets our requirements. * Martin suggests the ICANN-IFO contract contain an item about the budget to ensure responsibility * The CWG needs to be vigilant regarding the implementation. Jonathan raises the question about role of group in implementation Action: refer Sidley to transcript and audio at this point of the meeting (about 1h into the call) so that they can incorporate the discussion on budget into their Public Comment drafting work. Appeals mechanism: Attention given to ccTLDs ability to appeal issues (not related to delegations/redelegation until the ccTLDs determine a process for that). Action: Sidley to consider whether the scope of the enhanced IRP is adquate to cover PTI decisions. SCWG: No action required. CCWG has reviewed the issue and aware of the community mechanism needed to apply to the SCWG in the future. 5. AOB Proposal for another CWG meeting next week at 17:00 UTC in order to address the Sidley draft of public comment submission to CCWG and ratify the SLEWG document. 6. Closing remarks Close, see you next week
