Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Meeting #42 on 16 April will be available here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52895711 Action Items Action (Alan): compare DT-F recommendations with DT-C's CSC Charter Action (Chairs): consider Q&A session later in PC period. Action (Chairs): communicate 2-day delay Notes 1. Opening Remarks / Recap of High Intensity Meeting * 2-day meeting on Monday/Tuesday (there were 12h of total meeting time) * Sidley Austin provided support on structural elements of proposal and group decided to focus on legal separation variant of the internal model * Draft is being worked on -- sent to list today for an initial review, but the draft for comment will be delivered tomorrow 2. Update on communications with CCWG-Accountability * Sent a letter to CCWG chairs yesterday evening to give an update on the dependencies and 'instructions' to the CCWG * Four areas addressed: ICANN budget, community empowerment, review and redress, appeal mechanisms (not for ccTLDs but there is still interest for gTLDs) * List came up in Istanbul, but the content was CWG-issued from the Mon/Tues meetings 3. Update from Client Committee (Greg) Had a call today at 14:00 UTC Deliverables for Sidley: 1. Review DT-C (CSC) output for the competition / anti-trust concerns, more generally on governance best practices 2. Review the CCWG dependencies list (is it specific enough? have we locked down our dependency on the CCWG) 3. Description of the model to feed into the work of the CWG ("boil down" the 4 April memo). Include: a. Strengths and weaknesses for legal separation model (could be used as implications of model for the "implications" section of proposal (section IV)) b. Updated diagram c. PTI Board responsibilities (scoping the minimum function of the PTI Board) 4. Outcome of combined DT-C; DT-M; DT-N call * Priority 2 DTs have been addressed. See notes from meeting #38 for further detail. * DT-H on .INT was awaiting input from GAC. The input was received today. * DT-C (CSC) has been mindful of not giving a decision-making role to the CSC. * DT-C; DT-M; and DT-N have worked together to resolve issues and provide a solution for the proposal (knitting the DTs' work together). 5. DT-F recommendations (Alan) * Document is by not final * DT-F does not know what is going to happen with Cooperative Agreement, so there are various parts that cannot be addressed by DT-F Action (Alan): compare DT-F recommendations with DT-C's CSC Charter 6. DT-A recommendations (Paul) * Initial comments received from IANA on the DT-A draft * Further discussion next week based on Paul's schedule. * CWG may need placeholder text considering upcoming public comment date 7. DT-X recommendations and suggested incorporation (Avri) * Google doc: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WvBqtgXJ7rNrbN-5Tjf5-gi80aZ2oRYDtF_JLrET...

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WvBqtgXJ7rNrbN-5Tjf5-gi80aZ2oRYDtF_JLrET...>

* Need to continue working on text to include in draft proposal as soon as possible 8. Action plan leading to Public Comment . Friday 17 April - Monday 20 April at 23:59 UTC: Publish the draft on Friday morning UTC in order to give the group 3 days (Sat, Sun, Mon) to review and send comments. Ask for comments to be received by Monday at 23:59 UTC. . Tuesday 21 April: Dedicate Tuesday call to review of proposal (this can be a dry-run for the Webinars). . Wednesday 22 April: Publish the proposal for Public Comment on Wednesday 22 April. This will reduce the Public Comment by two days (28 days instead of 30 days). . Thursday 23 April: Call TBC . Friday 24 April: Webinars and public briefing on Proposal on Friday at 06:00 UTC (Lise) and 14:00 UTC (Jonathan) Action (Chairs): consider Q&A session later in PC period. Action (Chairs): communicate 2-day delay 3 outputs for Public Comment Short form proposal Long form proposal Xplane summary/bird's eye view 9. AOB (a) Update on principles: Martin and Lise working on finalizing principles (b) Other How to deal with unanswered questions (some that involve other communities)? A few groups left questions for future work. The goal is to get a proposal out. CWG can continue working. Brenda has updated the attendance spreadsheets: <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Attendance+Log+CWG-Ste...> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Attendance+Log+CWG-Ste.... 1st place for top attendance goes to Greg Shatan. 2nd place is Graeme Bunton. 10. Closing