Two important observations I would make:
 
1.       It is clear that whoever drafted the RZERC charter has reverted to the legacy mindset of a single IANA Functions Operator for names, numbers and protocols. The composition of the group, for example, does not distinguish between the IFO for names and the IFO for protocols and numbers.  Let me remind everyone that the Root Zone (RZ) that ICANN will contract for management of and which this RZERC will consider is a NAMES function only. Therefore it is unclear to me why ASO is included on this body and the management of numbers “root” has very little if any connection to the architecture and operation of the RZM.
 
2.       Another issue that seems to be overlooked is that going forward, RZM will be a paid contractor of ICANN, therefore the incumbent RZM might be considered to have a conflict of interest in RZERC consultations with ICANN about the RZM contract terms and conditions. On the other hand, we certainly do want the incumbent RZM to be a part of this committee because of the operational knowledge it would bring to bear. So their role should be circumscribed appropriately; e.g., the incumbent RZM contractor should not chair the committee and any definition of “consensus” should not allow an incumbent RZM to block recommendations pertaining to its own role or contract.
 
A not-so important but funny observation: Seun’s modifications referred to “expenses incurred in the curse of carrying out their services” 
 
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Seun Ojedeji
Sent: Sunday, May 8, 2016 2:14 AM
To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>
Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] RZERC Charter for CWG review
 
Dear all,
Kindly find attached a document that contains my comments, and proposed edits.
Regards
 
On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 12:17 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com > wrote:

Thanks, that's helpful (especially the funding part)

Regards

Sent from my LG G4

Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On 3 May 2016 11:53 p.m., "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca > wrote:

At 03/05/2016 06:21 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:

Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b67048f2cc5610531f78803"

X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:

         1;SN1PR0301MB2030;9:yXSxQKq/XJtXcx74HQ6pcWbqx+b5hJebhZjStOfe2vcCaFJ13kuGboEAYxZedfvpfqoQkW2my/77y/UqGl8n/BZrde2MO+2rOPKk/tzSDPSclTyxHy+8MwGyIS5oWnPtJXGBJ+eJUMHEFVAZUN4McvB0XW/SRKMbIhIxtENblbs=

Dear Co-Chairs/all,

Looking at the acronym "RZERC" makes me feel I probably may have been lagging behind with happenings within the CWG. ;-)

Just a few clarification question/comments:

- What is RZERC(I assume it's an acronym) as the charter does not seem to include description.

It stands for the Root Zone Evolution Review Committee

- I did a quick find on the ICG proposal and don't see reference to "RZERC", what part of the ICG (to be specific CWG) proposal is this implementing?

The name is new. The committee is described in paragraph 155 of the CWG proposal. 1155 of the ICG proposal I think.

- I note that review of charter every 5 years is indicated, but there seem to be no room to modify the charter in situations requiring urgent need.

The 5 years is a mandatory review.

- There is no process of replacing members indicated.

There is similarly no process for formally naming them. It is up to the appointing body (they all come from somewhere specific).

- What part of the ICANN(or perhaps it's going to be applicable to PTI ) bylaw recognises the formation of the RZERC

ICANN. The RZERC advises the ICANN Board and can act as an advisor to other groups as necessary (such as IANA itself)

- Is the RZERC a new ICANN AC?

It is an advisory committee, but not an Advisory Committee in the sense of the ACs defined in the Bylaws. The Board has the responsibility of approving substantive changes in the RZ architecture and operation. The RZERC is a resource it uses to do the analysis.

- Who funds the activities of the RZERC?

To the extent that it needs funds, ICANN.

- Renumeration of the group is not explicitly indicated in the charter; is this a volunteer group or a paid group?

They are paid double what I am paid and tripple what you are paid.

- What will be the connection between RZERC and PTI board (since they will be more closer to IANA than ICANN board post-transition) since it seem this group reports/works with ICANN board?

No connection. The PTI Board oversees the physical operation of PTI. The ICANN Board, replacing NTIA, is responsible for RZ issues as per the previously mentioned section of the CWG/ICG reports.

Alan

Regards

Sent from my LG G4

Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On 3 May 2016 6:20 p.m., "Lise Fuhr" <Fuhr@etno.eu> wrote:

Dear CWG,

 

Attached is the RZERC charter for your review. We would like to receive your comments at 17 May at the latest 23.59 utc (2 week review period). We furthermore plan to have a CWG call at the 12 may where the RZERC Charter will be discussed.

 

Best regards,

Jonathan and Lise

_______________________________________________

CWG-Stewardship mailing list

CWG-Stewardship@icann.org

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Content-Disposition: inline

X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:

         1;SN1PR0301MB2030;9:yXSxQKq/XJtXcx74HQ6pcWbqx+b5hJebhZjStOfe2vcCaFJ13kuGboEAYxZedfvpfqoQkW2my/77y/UqGl8n/BZrde2MO+2rOPKk/tzSDPSclTyxHy+8MwGyIS5oWnPtJXGBJ+eJUMHEFVAZUN4McvB0XW/SRKMbIhIxtENblbs=

_______________________________________________

CWG-Stewardship mailing list

CWG-Stewardship@icann.org

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seun Ojedeji,

Federal University Oye-Ekiti

web:     http://www.fuoye.edu.ng

Mobile: +2348035233535

alt email: seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng

Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!