I do support this proposal.

Thanks for being so attentive to these details.

-ed

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:13 PM Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:

All,

Lise and I today attended the session entitled:

https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/mon-iana-stewardship-implementation

It became clear during the course of the session that material new details on the implementation of the CWG Stewardship proposal were being released for the first time.

This raises two issues:

1. Process – How do we ensure that ICANN implementation staff do not get out of synchronisation with the CWG?
2. Substance – Do we agree with the details presented in the session today?

Both Lise and I stood up and made points to this effect during the meeting as did some of the CWG Stewardship Members / Participants.
We also spoke with Akram & Trang afterwards. It does seem that this was an inadvertent oversight driven by a desire and need to make progress.

However, it is also evident that there is a need for the ICANN staff implementation team to have more rapid or agile reference to the CWG, in addition to our bi-weekly updates / meetings.

Therefore, in order to address this need, the co-chairs propose to form an implementation oversight task force comprising the CWG co-chairs and the DT leads. The outcomes will come back to the CWG in any case but we believe that we need a capability to track the implementation work as closely as possible and as it evolves.

Please can we have any comments or concerns with this proposal as soon as possible.

Thank-you,

Lise and Jonathan
Co-Chairs, CWG Stewardship
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship