Thanks Grace. My guess is that it was an oversight, one I should have caught a long time ago. Chuck From: Grace Abuhamad [mailto:grace.abuhamad@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 5:47 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; jrobinson@afilias.info; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] FW: Revisions to CWG-related Bylaw Provisions Chuck, this is consistent with the CWG-Stewardship proposal language (paragraphs 283 and 393). I don’t believe that this was an oversight in the proposal, because I remember long discussions on composition of each of these teams. To find the rationale for each of these, I would need to go back and do some digging through earlier drafts and transcripts. -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability> . STAY UPDATED <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#status> . FOLLOW <https://twitter.com/icann> . ENGAGE <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#involved> . From: <cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> Date: Thursday, April 14, 2016 at 5:15 PM To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info>, "cwg-stewardship@icann.org" <cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] FW: Revisions to CWG-related Bylaw Provisions I note that Section 18.7 (COMPOSITION OF IFR TEAMS) still says: “Two representatives appointed by the Registries Stakeholder Group”. As I previously pointed out: this is inconsistent with the composition of a SIFR for which the RySG appoints three representatives; and it is one less than the ccTLDs. At a minimum I request an explanation why this change wasn’t made and also why the ccTLD registries would be allowed one more representative than gTLD registries. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 10:19 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] FW: Revisions to CWG-related Bylaw Provisions FYI From: Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com] Sent: 13 April 2016 18:01 To: Client Committee <cwg-client@icann.org> Subject: [client com] FW: Revisions to CWG-related Bylaw Provisions Dear All, Attached are revisions to the bylaws that we have sent to ICANN for incorporation into the current draft. These include the feedback we have received thus far from CWG, as well as certain other clean up edits. Best regards, Sharon SHARON R. FLANAGAN SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP +1 415 772 1271 sflanagan@sidley.com From: Flanagan, Sharon Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 10:00 AM To: Samantha.Eisner@icann.org; John Jeffrey; Grace Abuhamad; Bernard Turcotte Cc: Sidley ICANN CCWG; ICANN@adlercolvin.com; Gregory, Holly Subject: Revisions to CWG-related Bylaw Provisions All, Attached are edits to the CWG-related bylaw provisions: Articles 16-19, which edits are attached, and Section 22.4(f), which edits are below. CWG is still discussing certain open points. Section 22.4(f): cid:image002.jpg@01D1956B.35E90D00 Best regards, Sharon SHARON R. FLANAGAN SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP +1 415 772 1271 <mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com> sflanagan@sidley.com **************************************************************************************************** This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us immediately. ****************************************************************************************************