CWG IANA meeting #39 on 14 April at 10:00 UTC

Notes:

Seun Ojedeji on audio only at this time.

Opening Remarks

Purpose of call: discuss structural considerations.
The 'Punch list' will guide the conversation
There are issues with the order of questions in the 'Punch List' but it represents a good aide memoire
In Istanbul, the group set aside 5 models and decided to focus on 2 variations of an internal model
Emergence of a 'reverse hybrid model' on the list in the last few hours. For the present, we should not get involved in a detailed conversation on the 'reverse hybrid'
Try to converge our thinking as opposed to create new discussions.

Chairs have change the order of the questions on the 'Punch List'

Question 9 deals with 'which variant' --> sounds like the group is leaning torward legal entity

With legal entity, if there were ever bankruptcy at ICANN, it would not necessarily affect PTI

The entity can be sued (each party can be)

Poll for the group (to get sense of the room):

Which variant is preffered?

- legal separation (56.5%)

- functional separation (21.7%)

- undecided (21.7%)

---> direction for Question 9: legal separation variant preference

Question 6: Accountability on ICANN/PTI Contract

Periodic Review could trigger separation

- address accountability in contract? yes, relevant (but details need to be worked out)

- address through PRF and/or CSC? the PRF can review the contract/SOW, but does not hold contract. The CSC is also a review/performance management structure.

- Are other means required? The CCWG will enhance ICANN's accountability mechanisms and these will be important to structure.

Question 1: What role for PTI Board?

Insider board agreed on, subject to other new structures withstanding stress tests. And comprehensive contract.

Edit (staff/DT-N): change the term 'Periodic Review Team' to something like 'IANA Review Team'.