Notes, Recordings, Transcript CWG IANA Meeting #78 - 31 March 2016
Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Meeting #78 on 31 March will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/6wWAAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda Action Items * Action item 1#: Lise to communicate agreement to go with supermajority vote for question 1, noting that reference should be changed to GNSO Council and ccNSO Council. * Action item #2: Lise to communicate agreement to go with 30 days for question 2. * Action item #3: Lise to confirm as soon as possible whether additional CWG-Stewardship call is scheduled for next week. * Action item #4: CWG-Stewardship to provide input on the proposed financial objectives for PTI as circulated to the mailing list within 48 hours. * Action item #5: Confirm on list no objections to proposed recommendation to ensure that PTI multi-year guaranteed funding is covered in the Bylaws within 48 hours. * Action item #6: CWG-Stewardship to provide feedback on the suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence within 48 hours. * Action item #7: Confirm agreement with recommendation that all three IANA functions will be moved to PTI as it was originally foreseen in the ICG/CWG-Stewardship Proposal. Notes 1. Opening Remarks * Quite a few developments since Marrakesh - a lot of work has gone into implementation related activities including Bylaw drafting. * DT-O has been meeting as well to discuss items related to the budget. * Further meetings have taken place with the other operational communities concerning IPR. * Implementation Oversight Task Force was created and kicked off after ICANN Meeting Marrakesh - consists of ICANN Implementation Team, Chairs of CWG-Stewardship, DT Leads, Chair of ICG and representatives of other operational communities. TF to serve as a sounding board for ICANN implementation staff - any decisions are brought back to the CWG-Stewardship for review. TF has two meetings a week scheduled, to be used if needed. All of the meetings are recorded and transcripts will now be provided as well. Mailing list archives are publicly available. All the materials and recordings are available at <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation> https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation. Those interested to join the TF as an observer, please contact <mailto:yuko.green@icann.org> yuko.green@icann.org. 2. Implementation Planning - Staff update (Trang Nguyen) - see <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58721771/CWG%20Update%2031M... ficationDate=1459441722785&api=v2> slide deck presented. * Interim PTI Board: will the ICANN Board appoint all 5 people and then these will be replaced? No, ICANN Board would appoint ICANN PTI Board members, these would not be considered interim. Further consideration will need to be given to how to select the interim independent Board members (see also PTI Board & Structure item) * Bylaws drafting - Legal advisors where pleased with co-operation between all the lawyers. Are progressing in a timely fashion. Expect to be ready to send something for review to CCWG-Accountability and CWG-Stewardship by 1 April. See questions circulated by Lise. * Question 1 - recommendation to go with supermajority vote. Reference should be to ccNSO Council and GNSO Council (not ccNSO and GNSO). Do both Councils have supermajority defined? GNSO Council Supermajority is defined in the ICANN Bylaws. What is the rationale for recommending a supermajority vote? Items are intended to have a high approval treshold. Agreement to follow the recommendation for a supermajority vote. Action item 1#: Lise to communicate agreement to go with supermajority vote for question 1, noting that reference should be changed to GNSO Council and ccNSO Council. * Question 19 - recommendation to go with 30 days. Agreement to go with 30 days. Action item #2: Lise to communicate agreement to go with 30 days for question 2. * How should CWG-Stewardship go about reviewing the Bylaws? Bylaws are expected to be published for public comment by 20 April so any input from the CWG-Stewardship would need to be received before that time. Consider scheduling an additional CWG-Stewardship meeting for next week. Action item #3: Lise to confirm as soon as possible whether additional CWG-Stewardship call is scheduled for next week. * Budget process (Chuck Gomes) - see financial objectives for PTI as developed by DT O and circulated to the mailing list. Consider what needs to appear in the Bylaws, for example in relation to reserve. If not in Bylaws, maybe in the contract? DT O is of the view that there should be a statement in the Bylaws that there should be multi-year guaranteed funding for PTI. DT O communicated this to Becky Burr who was involved in the Bylaw drafting, noting that the CWG-Stewardship had not agreed to it yet. Discussed in previous call that Sidley would provide a light touch approach, not committing to any kind of specific resolution, allowing for further deliberations to take place. General principle should be embodied in the Bylaws, the solution should be decided and embodied elsewhere. Support for this approach by those on the call, provide some additional time to those not on the call to express support / objection. * CWG-Stewardship to consider whether to submit comments on the FY17 Budget. DT-O to expected to make a recommendation to the CWG-Stewardship following tommorow's DT-O meeting. Deadline for comments is 30 April. Action item #4: CWG-Stewardship to provide input on the proposed financial objectives for PTI as circulated to the mailing list within 48 hours. Action item #5: Confirm on list no objections to proposed recommendation to ensure that PTI multi-year guaranteed funding is covered in the Bylaws within 48 hours. * CSC Charter - staff working with Donna (GNSO), Katrina (ccNSO) and relevant staff to work through some of the issues in relation to the CSC. For example, appointment / re-appointment procedures in GNSO and ccNSO. Status update will be provided to CWG-Stewardship team following those discussions. Ensure that both communities understand what the requirements are for the creation of CSC and relevant procedures are in place, for example for the approval of the CSC membership. Working out geographic diversity and skills requirements. * PTI Board & Structure: overview of discussions by IOTF - see slides presented during call. Suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence until the NomCom would be able to make the selection as originally foreseen as part of their normal selection cycle. Action item #6: CWG-Stewardship to provide feedback on the suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence within 48 hours. * All three IANA functions will be moved to PTI. This is considered to be in line with the CWG-Stewardship proposal. * ICANN legal is preparing memo in relation to difficulties of transferring staff to PTI. To be discussed further. Action item #7: Confirm agreement with recommendation that all three IANA functions will be moved to PTI as it was originally foreseen in the ICG/CWG-Stewardship Proposal. 3. IANA IPR * See <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58721771/ProposedPrincipalT... ?version=1&modificationDate=1459444884447&api=v2> document shared during meeting and overview provided by Greg. Principle terms developed by all three communities. Now being reviewed by legal counsel of other communities. Once feedback comes back, these will be reviewed by Sidley, followed by further discussion and possible revision by the whole group. Following finalization of principles terms, group would move on to creating the actual documents required. * Consider including an introductory paragraph regarding history of IETF Trust. * More detailed discussion to take place in CWG-Stewardship at a later stage. 4. AOB * Next meeting on 14 April at 16:00 UTC. (note that a special meeting may be scheduled next week to review and discuss the draft Bylaws). 5. Closing Remarks
Thanks for the share, a few comments/questions below: +1 to the suggestion on the interim directors (assuming the duo are accepts). As to the conflict of interest, do we really have list of items that denotes conflict of interest for PTI independent directors? Or are we going to be using the ones set for the ICANN directors? Secondly, on filling the main independent directors; do we plan to have that done by the current nomcom? If yes, is the CWG in the position to provide a more detailed criteria or that would be within the scope of IOT (the implantation team)? Though I have not listened to the transcript (due to bandwidth) but I was wondering why there where doubts about that fact that the 3 main IANA functions will be moved to PTI. Is there any section of the proposal(s) that envisaged otherwise? Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 31 Mar 2016 19:15, "Brenda Brewer" <brenda.brewer@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Meeting #78 on 31 March will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/6wWAAw
A copy of the notes and action items may be found below.
Kind regards,
Brenda
[image: ---] *Action Items*
- *Action item 1#: Lise to communicate agreement to go with supermajority vote for question 1, noting that reference * * should be changed to GNSO Council and ccNSO Council.* - *Action item #2: Lise to communicate agreement to go with 30 days for question 2.* - *Action item #3: Lise to confirm as soon as possible whether additional CWG-Stewardship call is scheduled for next week.* - *Action item #4: CWG-Stewardship to provide input on the proposed financial objectives for PTI as circulated to the mailing list within 48 hours. * - *Action item #5: Confirm on list no objections to proposed recommendation to ensure that PTI multi-year guaranteed funding * * is covered in the Bylaws within 48 hours. * - *Action item #6: CWG-Stewardship to provide feedback on the suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim * * PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence within 48 hours.* - *Action item #7: Confirm agreement with recommendation that all three IANA functions will be moved to PTI as it was * * originally foreseen in the ICG/CWG-Stewardship Proposal. *
*Notes*
1. Opening Remarks
· Quite a few developments since Marrakesh - a lot of work has gone into implementation related activities including Bylaw drafting.
· DT-O has been meeting as well to discuss items related to the budget.
· Further meetings have taken place with the other operational communities concerning IPR.
· Implementation Oversight Task Force was created and kicked off after ICANN Meeting Marrakesh - consists of
ICANN Implementation Team, Chairs of CWG-Stewardship, DT Leads, Chair of ICG and representatives
of other operational communities. TF to serve as a sounding board for ICANN implementation staff - any decisions
are brought back to the CWG-Stewardship for review. TF has two meetings a week scheduled, to be
used if needed. All of the meetings are recorded and transcripts will now be provided as well. Mailing list archives are publicly available. All the materials and recordings are available at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation. <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation> Those interested to join the TF as an observer, please contact yuko.green@icann.org.
2. Implementation Planning - Staff update (Trang Nguyen) - see slide deck <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58721771/CWG%20Update%2031M...> presented.
· Interim PTI Board: will the ICANN Board appoint all 5 people and then these will be replaced? No, ICANN Board
would appoint ICANN PTI Board members, these would not be considered interim. Further consideration will need
to be given to how to select the interim independent Board members (see also PTI Board & Structure item)
· Bylaws drafting - Legal advisors where pleased with co-operation between all the lawyers. Are progressing in a timely
fashion. Expect to be ready to send something for review to CCWG-Accountability and CWG-Stewardship by 1 April. See questions circulated by Lise.
· Question 1 - recommendation to go with supermajority vote. Reference should be to ccNSO Council and GNSO
Council (not ccNSO and GNSO). Do both Councils have supermajority defined? GNSO Council Supermajority is
defined in the ICANN Bylaws. What is the rationale for recommending a supermajority vote? Items are intended to
have a high approval treshold. Agreement to follow the recommendation for a supermajority vote.
*Action item 1#:* Lise to communicate agreement to go with supermajority vote for question 1, noting that reference should be changed to GNSO Council and ccNSO Council.
· Question 19 - recommendation to go with 30 days. Agreement to go with 30 days.
*Action item #2:* Lise to communicate agreement to go with 30 days for question 2.
· How should CWG-Stewardship go about reviewing the Bylaws? Bylaws are expected to be published for public
comment by 20 April so any input from the CWG-Stewardship would need to be received before that time. Consider scheduling an additional CWG-Stewardship meeting for next week.
*Action item #3* : Lise to confirm as soon as possible whether additional CWG-Stewardship call is scheduled for next week.
· Budget process (Chuck Gomes) - see financial objectives for PTI as developed by DT O and circulated to the mailing
list. Consider what needs to appear in the Bylaws, for example in relation to reserve. If not in Bylaws, maybe in the
contract? DT O is of the view that there should be a statement in the Bylaws that there should be multi-year guaranteed
funding for PTI. DT O communicated this to Becky Burr who was involved in the Bylaw drafting, noting that the CWG-Stewardship had not agreed to it yet. Discussed in previous call that Sidley would provide a light touch approach, not
committing to any kind of specific resolution, allowing for further deliberations to take place. General principle should
be embodied in the Bylaws, the solution should be decided and embodied elsewhere. Support for this approach by those
on the call, provide some additional time to those not on the call to express support / objection.
· CWG-Stewardship to consider whether to submit comments on the FY17 Budget. DT-O to expected to make a
recommendation to the CWG-Stewardship following tommorow's DT-O meeting. Deadline for comments is 30 April.
*Action item #* 4: CWG-Stewardship to provide input on the proposed financial objectives for PTI as circulated to the mailing list within 48 hours.
*Action item #5* : Confirm on list no objections to proposed recommendation to ensure that PTI multi-year guaranteed funding is covered in the Bylaws within 48 hours.
· CSC Charter - staff working with Donna (GNSO), Katrina (ccNSO) and relevant staff to work through some of the
issues in relation to the CSC. For example, appointment / re-appointment procedures in GNSO and ccNSO. Status
update will be provided to CWG-Stewardship team following those discussions. Ensure that both communities
understand what the requirements are for the creation of CSC and relevant procedures are in place, for example
for the approval of the CSC membership. Working out geographic diversity and skills requirements.
· PTI Board & Structure: overview of discussions by IOTF - see slides presented during call. Suggestion to have
Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict
and independence until the NomCom would be able to make the selection as originally foreseen as part of their normal selection cycle.
*Action item #6* : CWG-Stewardship to provide feedback on the suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim
PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence within 48 hours.
· All three IANA functions will be moved to PTI. This is considered to be in line with the CWG-Stewardship proposal.
· ICANN legal is preparing memo in relation to difficulties of transferring staff to PTI. To be discussed further.
*Action item #7* : Confirm agreement with recommendation that all three IANA functions will be moved to PTI as it was originally foreseen in the ICG/CWG-Stewardship Proposal.
3. IANA IPR
· See document <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58721771/ProposedPrincipalT...> shared during meeting and overview provided by Greg. Principle terms developed by all three
communities. Now being reviewed by legal counsel of other communities. Once feedback comes back, these will
be reviewed by Sidley, followed by further discussion and possible revision by the whole group. Following finalization
of principles terms, group would move on to creating the actual documents required.
· Consider including an introductory paragraph regarding history of IETF Trust.
· More detailed discussion to take place in CWG-Stewardship at a later stage.
4. AOB
· Next meeting on 14 April at 16:00 UTC. (note that a special meeting may be scheduled next week to review and discuss the draft Bylaws).
5. Closing Remarks
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
Seun, It is my understanding that the NomCom would not select PTI directors until their next cycle so it would not be the current NomCom. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Seun Ojedeji Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 2:37 PM To: Brenda Brewer Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Notes, Recordings, Transcript CWG IANA Meeting #78 - 31 March 2016 Thanks for the share, a few comments/questions below: +1 to the suggestion on the interim directors (assuming the duo are accepts). As to the conflict of interest, do we really have list of items that denotes conflict of interest for PTI independent directors? Or are we going to be using the ones set for the ICANN directors? Secondly, on filling the main independent directors; do we plan to have that done by the current nomcom? If yes, is the CWG in the position to provide a more detailed criteria or that would be within the scope of IOT (the implantation team)? Though I have not listened to the transcript (due to bandwidth) but I was wondering why there where doubts about that fact that the 3 main IANA functions will be moved to PTI. Is there any section of the proposal(s) that envisaged otherwise? Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 31 Mar 2016 19:15, "Brenda Brewer" <brenda.brewer@icann.org<mailto:brenda.brewer@icann.org>> wrote: [cid:image001.gif@01D18B86.6EA942C0] Dear all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Meeting #78 on 31 March will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/6wWAAw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Kind regards, Brenda [---] Action Items * Action item 1#: Lise to communicate agreement to go with supermajority vote for question 1, noting that reference should be changed to GNSO Council and ccNSO Council. * Action item #2: Lise to communicate agreement to go with 30 days for question 2. * Action item #3: Lise to confirm as soon as possible whether additional CWG-Stewardship call is scheduled for next week. * Action item #4: CWG-Stewardship to provide input on the proposed financial objectives for PTI as circulated to the mailing list within 48 hours. * Action item #5: Confirm on list no objections to proposed recommendation to ensure that PTI multi-year guaranteed funding is covered in the Bylaws within 48 hours. * Action item #6: CWG-Stewardship to provide feedback on the suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence within 48 hours. * Action item #7: Confirm agreement with recommendation that all three IANA functions will be moved to PTI as it was originally foreseen in the ICG/CWG-Stewardship Proposal. Notes 1. Opening Remarks • Quite a few developments since Marrakesh - a lot of work has gone into implementation related activities including Bylaw drafting. • DT-O has been meeting as well to discuss items related to the budget. • Further meetings have taken place with the other operational communities concerning IPR. • Implementation Oversight Task Force was created and kicked off after ICANN Meeting Marrakesh - consists of ICANN Implementation Team, Chairs of CWG-Stewardship, DT Leads, Chair of ICG and representatives of other operational communities. TF to serve as a sounding board for ICANN implementation staff - any decisions are brought back to the CWG-Stewardship for review. TF has two meetings a week scheduled, to be used if needed. All of the meetings are recorded and transcripts will now be provided as well. Mailing list archives are publicly available. All the materials and recordings are available at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation. <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation> Those interested to join the TF as an observer, please contact yuko.green@icann.org<mailto:yuko.green@icann.org>. 2. Implementation Planning - Staff update (Trang Nguyen) - see slide deck<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58721771/CWG%20Update%2031M...> presented. • Interim PTI Board: will the ICANN Board appoint all 5 people and then these will be replaced? No, ICANN Board would appoint ICANN PTI Board members, these would not be considered interim. Further consideration will need to be given to how to select the interim independent Board members (see also PTI Board & Structure item) • Bylaws drafting - Legal advisors where pleased with co-operation between all the lawyers. Are progressing in a timely fashion. Expect to be ready to send something for review to CCWG-Accountability and CWG-Stewardship by 1 April. See questions circulated by Lise. • Question 1 - recommendation to go with supermajority vote. Reference should be to ccNSO Council and GNSO Council (not ccNSO and GNSO). Do both Councils have supermajority defined? GNSO Council Supermajority is defined in the ICANN Bylaws. What is the rationale for recommending a supermajority vote? Items are intended to have a high approval treshold. Agreement to follow the recommendation for a supermajority vote. Action item 1#: Lise to communicate agreement to go with supermajority vote for question 1, noting that reference should be changed to GNSO Council and ccNSO Council. • Question 19 - recommendation to go with 30 days. Agreement to go with 30 days. Action item #2: Lise to communicate agreement to go with 30 days for question 2. • How should CWG-Stewardship go about reviewing the Bylaws? Bylaws are expected to be published for public comment by 20 April so any input from the CWG-Stewardship would need to be received before that time. Consider scheduling an additional CWG-Stewardship meeting for next week. Action item #3: Lise to confirm as soon as possible whether additional CWG-Stewardship call is scheduled for next week. • Budget process (Chuck Gomes) - see financial objectives for PTI as developed by DT O and circulated to the mailing list. Consider what needs to appear in the Bylaws, for example in relation to reserve. If not in Bylaws, maybe in the contract? DT O is of the view that there should be a statement in the Bylaws that there should be multi-year guaranteed funding for PTI. DT O communicated this to Becky Burr who was involved in the Bylaw drafting, noting that the CWG-Stewardship had not agreed to it yet. Discussed in previous call that Sidley would provide a light touch approach, not committing to any kind of specific resolution, allowing for further deliberations to take place. General principle should be embodied in the Bylaws, the solution should be decided and embodied elsewhere. Support for this approach by those on the call, provide some additional time to those not on the call to express support / objection. • CWG-Stewardship to consider whether to submit comments on the FY17 Budget. DT-O to expected to make a recommendation to the CWG-Stewardship following tommorow's DT-O meeting. Deadline for comments is 30 April. Action item #4: CWG-Stewardship to provide input on the proposed financial objectives for PTI as circulated to the mailing list within 48 hours. Action item #5: Confirm on list no objections to proposed recommendation to ensure that PTI multi-year guaranteed funding is covered in the Bylaws within 48 hours. • CSC Charter - staff working with Donna (GNSO), Katrina (ccNSO) and relevant staff to work through some of the issues in relation to the CSC. For example, appointment / re-appointment procedures in GNSO and ccNSO. Status update will be provided to CWG-Stewardship team following those discussions. Ensure that both communities understand what the requirements are for the creation of CSC and relevant procedures are in place, for example for the approval of the CSC membership. Working out geographic diversity and skills requirements. • PTI Board & Structure: overview of discussions by IOTF - see slides presented during call. Suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence until the NomCom would be able to make the selection as originally foreseen as part of their normal selection cycle. Action item #6: CWG-Stewardship to provide feedback on the suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence within 48 hours. • All three IANA functions will be moved to PTI. This is considered to be in line with the CWG-Stewardship proposal. • ICANN legal is preparing memo in relation to difficulties of transferring staff to PTI. To be discussed further. Action item #7: Confirm agreement with recommendation that all three IANA functions will be moved to PTI as it was originally foreseen in the ICG/CWG-Stewardship Proposal. 3. IANA IPR • See document<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58721771/ProposedPrincipalT...> shared during meeting and overview provided by Greg. Principle terms developed by all three communities. Now being reviewed by legal counsel of other communities. Once feedback comes back, these will be reviewed by Sidley, followed by further discussion and possible revision by the whole group. Following finalization of principles terms, group would move on to creating the actual documents required. • Consider including an introductory paragraph regarding history of IETF Trust. • More detailed discussion to take place in CWG-Stewardship at a later stage. 4. AOB • Next meeting on 14 April at 16:00 UTC. (note that a special meeting may be scheduled next week to review and discuss the draft Bylaws). 5. Closing Remarks _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
participants (3)
-
Brenda Brewer -
Gomes, Chuck -
Seun Ojedeji