Here’s characteristics of the Standing Committee in the first table: “Small STANDING Committee consisting of IANA Customers Responsible for operational review and transactional performance review”.  What is the definition of IANA Customers?  Does it mean Direct IANA Naming Customers or is it broader than that?

 

Here’s the function shown in the second table for the Standing Committee: “Operational review, transactional performance review and developing SLAs”.  What are the definitions of ‘operational’ and ‘transactional’?  Is ‘transactional’ a subset of ‘operational’?

 

In the Operational Review flowchart for the Standing Committee, what is the difference between ‘Post reports / information for public information’ and ‘Review information received, publish results’?

 

Chuck

 

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 1:04 PM
To: Marika Konings; Donna Austin; cwg-stewardship@icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Comments on IANA Transition Flow Chart

 

One small update to the version I just sent around, I’ve added the word ‘DRAFT’ to the heading of each page to make it even clearer that these are drafts that are under review / discussion by the CWG.

 

Best regards,

 

Marika

 

From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>
Date: Friday 21 November 2014 18:02
To: Donna Austin <Donna.Austin@ariservices.com>, "cwg-stewardship@icann.org" <cwg-stewardship@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Comments on IANA Transition Flow Chart

 

Thanks, Donna. I’ve updated the flow chart (see attached) in relation to your comments on pages 1, 2 and 4  which I believe are minor changes and in line what was discussed in Frankfurt (on page 4, I changed ‘prepare' to ‘post' as I think that aligns with the intent of your comment?). In relation to your comments on page 5, those sound like details that may be better suited for the actual written proposal and not necessarily the flow chart? I’ve posted those comments here below so that it may be easier for others to review and comment.

 

Best regards,

 

Marika

 

Page 5 – Entering into Contract (Transition) - Comments from Donna Austin: 

  • Can we confirm that what we mean by commence the contracting process includes the development of a contract or agreement to replace the existing arrangement between ICANN and NTIA. We should be explicit.

·         I'd like to see a step in here that has the Review Team review the current contract IANA Functions contract as a starting point -- commencing community consultations seems unguided. 

From: Donna Austin <Donna.Austin@ariservices.com>
Date: Thursday 20 November 2014 17:37
To: "cwg-stewardship@icann.org" <cwg-stewardship@icann.org>
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Comments on IANA Transition Flow Chart

 

All

 

I have a few comments on the IANA Transition Flow Chart that I’ve attached here for consideration.

 

Thanks,

 

Donna

 

Description: Description: Description: ARI LogoDONNA 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
W  www.ariservices.com

 

Follow us on Twitter

 

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.

 

From: Donna Austin
Sent: Thursday, 20 November 2014 5:31 PM
To: Marika Konings (marika.konings@icann.org)
Cc: Bernard Turcotte (turcotte.bernard@gmail.com); Bart Boswinkel (bart.boswinkel@icann.org)
Subject:

 

Marika

 

I’ve made some comments on the attached. Let me know if you can’t access the comments.

 

Thanks

 

Donna