Andrew, As I mentioned, these could be handled by an Implementation Review Team working in conjunction with staff, which is the current GNSO approach to dealing with post-WG issues. Furthermore, we have clearly heard the message that this proposal is not going to succeed in getting the NTIA and Congressional approvals it needs if implementation is not factored in in some fashion. If we act like implementation is "not our problem," because it's not within the four corners of our charter, we are creating a problem, not solving one. In any event, we have discussed the need for the CWG to remain in place not only to interact with the ICG, but to be available to respond to inquiries from the NTIA and Congress. If that's not contemplated in the Charter, we should address that. It's highly unusual for an ICANN WG to have a proposal that requires external approvals, so if this is not contemplated in the Charter, it's because the current situation was not foreseen. If you think our work is done, other than answering questions, and that the implementation should be left to "other people," that's fine. Others have proposed extending the CWG, or believe that our mandate is broad enough to cover further activity without an extension or charter revision. But between the CWG, the ICG and ICANN, there needs to be some understanding of who those other people are, and how they well turn our blueprints into a structure that actually exists. If we wipe our hands and walk away, because the proposal is now in the ICG's hands, we might as well never have started in the first place. Greg On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 03:48:59PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
that is the case, we have not discussed whether the CWG/IRT will provide "terms of reference" for those bylaws, whether CWG/IRT and outside counsel will review drafts of these articles and bylaws, etc.
Is that within the charter? I'm not sure. My reading of the charter is that the goal was to produce a proposal. It has been produced, because it's shipped. That's the only top-line deliverable, in my reading.
There are two further items, which involve interaction with the ICG.
I don't see anything in the charter about proposals for the implementation and so on. I could easily be mistaken, however.
This is the charter I was reading:
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Charter
Best regards,
A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship