I do not think that Design Team J (CSC/MRT confidentiality and the perception of conflicts of interest) should be merged with Design Team I (Competition policy and Conflicts of Interest). Proposed Team I involves policy. Proposed Team J concerns specific procedures that will need to be developed for the CSC or CSC like body. Design Team M (Escalation Mechanisms beyond CSC) seems to overlap with Design Team C (CSC), especially the following items listed for C: * (e) Specify an instruction for CSC, describing remedial action in the event of poor performance of IANA against specified SLAs. * (g) Consider whether it would be appropriate for the CSC to be an initial point of escalation for TLD operators who are experiencing IANA performance issues. It may be that Team M would make a natural follow-up to Team C or that M could be subsumed by C. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 5:50 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs All, Please see attached for a status update on the Design Teams in preparation for our call tomorrow. Lise and I have reviewed the whole DT landscape and the current status is reflected in the document. Please note that it contains the following: * A status for each DT per the model of the step-by-step process which has been referenced in Annex A. * A note section as part of the index to provide additional comments as needed * New prospective DTs added o L (IANA Function Separation Mechanism), o M (Escalation mechanisms beyond CSC) and o N (Periodic Review of IANA Functions). * An updated description for .INT DT to match description in draft transition proposal. * An 'expression of interest field', currently only in the Authorization Function DT-D (as other expression of interests come in, we'll create the same for other DTs). Where a priority is set as final, that is the priority we have agreed. Where it is provisional, that is indicative pending further detail on the DT emerging. I look forward to reviewing this with you on the tomorrow. Thanks, Jonathan