If PTI is meant to coordinate/oversee operation of IANA then it needs to be clear if it's members would be representative or act in the interest of the overall subsidiary. It's accountability measures also needs to be clear (I presume that would be within the scope of CCWG to worry about)

In terms of composition, I don't think the CSC needs a special seat on PTI since PTI is now understood be managing entire IANA. The overall decision making powers of PTI may determine if GAC/ALAC Reps will be required.

On 20 Apr 2015 17:19, "Avri Doria" <avri@acm.org> wrote:

Hi,

I do not think we should avoid putting some multistakeholder character in the PTI.
And still keep it small.

If I understand, so far we have:

PTI Exec Director
IETF laision (are we sure they would agree to this extra level of participation?
                      We should be cautious assigning roles & responsibilities to them
                       that they may not wish to have)
RIR liaison (see about re IETF)
GNSO rep
ccNSO rep

I think we should consider a CSC rep (same caution as above,
                                                                this may be too operational for the CSC)

I would also recommend

a GAC rep (government particpation)
an ALAC (user particpatiion)

and possibly

an ICANN Board rep

If all accepted, that would bring it to 9.
Still a small number.

avri

On 20-Apr-15 11:55, Matthew Shears wrote:
Excellent suggestions.

On 4/20/2015 4:52 PM, Brenden Kuerbis wrote:
Hi MM,

I mostly support that approach, but I'd propose the following modifications. Instead of one naming community representative, I'd suggest one from the GNSO and one from ccNSO. In addition, I'd suggest adding the Exec Dir of the PTI to the board. In total, a lightweight and small five person board.

-- Brenden

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> wrote:

Regarding the composition of the board, the Summary of Legal Structure says only: “The PTI board could be an ICANN-designated board” and that we should “avoid the need to replicate the complexity of the multistakeholder ICANN board.” I agree with the latter concern, but we will need to flesh out more detail regarding the composition of the PTI board.

I have missed most recent calls, so perhaps this has been discussed already, but if it has, it didn’t appear in the Sidley Austin draft.

I think a simple and easily implementable solution would be to have ICANN-designated members be fixed by rules or bylaws (as opposed to wholly discretionary).

In my view, the PTI board should consist of the following 3 members:

1.       The existing IETF liaison on the ICANN board

2.       Someone designated by the ASO

3.       Someone designated by ICANN’s board essentially representing the naming community. One could add to this a recommendation from the CSC if one wanted, I would be amenable to that.

This PTI board would be balanced across the 3 operational communities and thus would be in a good position to provide oversight for the IANA functions.

--MM

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 8:50 AM
To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Structure and comments from Sidley Austin

Dear All,

Please be aware of the following documents from Sidley Austin.

1.       The structural model diagram

2.       Summary of Legal Structure

3.       CWG - Draft Transition Proposal (Sidley Comments)

Best regards,

Lise
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- 
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 (0)771 247 2987
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship