If I understand the latest charter of the CSC, it would not trigger reviews but would instead escalate to the ccNSO or GNSO. Is my understanding incorrect? Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Boyle Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 1:35 PM To: lisefuhrforwader; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Structure and comments from Sidley Austin - Periodic Reviews Reviewing the text with edits from Sidley I saw on pp48-9 (What should trigger reviews? In annex D) that "although a super-majority of the CSC may also be able trigger an "off-cycle" Periodic Review Function if necessary to ensure satisfactory performance." Given the small number of members proposed for the CSC, I am not sure this is meaningful! The DT-C work suggested an escalation to the ccNSO and GNSO for a decision - which would not be unreasonable given their role in organising the periodic reviews) - and a supermajority of the relevant councils makes a lot more sense. Martin From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr Sent: 20 April 2015 13:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto: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