Dear all, Following last week's call, I have discussed outstanding issues with those parties who had raised concerns about different parts of the text. I am grateful to them for their understanding and willingness to look for solutions and I am pleased to note that we have a near consensus document in the attached. There have been a number of small edits made in response to Andrew Sullivan's comments seeking to clarify the wording. These are in the heading and paragraphs 4, 5.iv & the second sentence of paragraph 7.ii. On the more difficult issues: * Seun has agreed to a revised (and simpler) text for footnote 1 (paragraph 5.2): "The term IANA functions operator refers to the entity that provides the service." This replaces the text proposed for the 12 March call, "The term IANA functions operator refers to the entity that provides the service, independent of the organisation that hosts it, currently ICANN." * Mary has agreed to drop her proposal in paragraph 10, to replace "must" by "should". This returns us to the original text of, "Multistakeholderism: any proposal must foster multi-stakeholder participation in the future oversight of the IANA functions." The outstanding point is on the first sentence of paragraph 7.ii. Elise Lindeberg has consulted within the GAC and proposed the text included in this current draft. Milton Mueller and Andrew Sullivan have both accepted this wording, but Paul Kane has rejected it. He has been invited to consider an alternative that he could work with. I'm afraid I will be a little late joining the call on Tuesday, but I hope we will be able to use the call to finalise the text. Martin