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