Well I don't know why this was written because almost every member of the CWG chartering organisations have an expectation on the CCWG accountability work and gave their approval to the final CWG proposal on similar reasoning that the accountability dependencies are meet. I expect that irrespective of this letter, the CWG is indeed following up with its proposal dependencies on the CCWG by default. Regards On 12 Feb 2016 7:52 a.m., "Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
Please see attached from the GNSO.
Jonathan & Lise
*From:* Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@icann.org] *Sent:* 09 February 2016 19:40 *To:* Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info>; Lise Fuhr <Fuhr@etno.eu> *Cc:* James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com>; Austin, Donna < Donna.Austin@neustar.biz>; Heather Forrest <Heather.Forrest@acu.edu.au>; Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad@icann.org>; gnso-secs@icann.org *Subject:* CWG-Stewardship Notification to GNSO Council concerning conditionality requirements
Dear Jonathan, Lise,
Please find attached for your attention a letter from the GNSO Council leadership concerning the CWG-Stewardship notification to the GNSO Council concerning the conditionality requirements in the CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Proposal.
Best regards,
Marika
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship