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
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
Thanks Chuck, Do you have a view as to whether or not DT-J should (or could) run simultaneous with DT-C (CSC) or should we wait until the DT-C is complete / nearer completion? With regard to DT-M, I agree that it may be a natural follow on to DT-C. A key overall issue to be clear on is the layers of escalation (and which DT deals with them) as we move from a relatively minor breach of an SLA on the one end through to a systematic and repeated failure to perform and moreover, an inability to remedy such failure at the other. Any further help in clarifying the scope of the respective DTs as we work through this will be helpful. Jonathan From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: 09 March 2015 22:20 To: jrobinson@afilias.info; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs 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
Please see my thoughts below Jonathan. Chuck From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 7:13 AM To: Gomes, Chuck; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs Thanks Chuck, Do you have a view as to whether or not DT-J should (or could) run simultaneous with DT-C (CSC) or should we wait until the DT-C is complete / nearer completion? [Chuck Gomes] Because DT-C is already formed (or nearly formed), I think it might be useful to get their opinion on this. In my own view, I think it could be done either way. Because of the overlap in their task descriptions, there probably would be advantages if at least some of the same people worked on both. With regard to DT-M, I agree that it may be a natural follow on to DT-C. A key overall issue to be clear on is the layers of escalation (and which DT deals with them) as we move from a relatively minor breach of an SLA on the one end through to a systematic and repeated failure to perform and moreover, an inability to remedy such failure at the other. Any further help in clarifying the scope of the respective DTs as we work through this will be helpful. [Chuck Gomes] DT-M will ultimately need to involve accountability mechanisms so its timing will eventually be dependent on the decisions made on accountability. It might be effective to divide it into two parts: 1) develop a proposed set of progressive escalation steps; 2) synchronize the escalation steps with the accountability recommendations once those are fairly well defined. I think 1) could be done anytime while 2) would need to wait until more progress is made on accountability measures, especially those at the higher end of escalation. Jonathan From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: 09 March 2015 22:20 To: jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs 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> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 5:50 PM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto: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
All, As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue. As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure: For Design Team B: * two or three ccTLD representatives * one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: * At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One IANA staff member (current or former) * One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA's current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT. The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership. Thanks, Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: 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
Hi Jonathan, I would like to be participate on Design Team B. My SOI can be found below. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Duchesneau+SOI Thank you. Stephanie Stephanie Duchesneau Neustar, Inc. / Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2623 Mobile: +1.703.731.2040 Fax: +1.202.533.2623 / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/> ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message. From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 5:44 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs All, As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue. As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure: For Design Team B: * two or three ccTLD representatives * one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: * At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One IANA staff member (current or former) * One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA's current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT. The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership. Thanks, Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: 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
Hi Jonathan & Lise, I would also like to volunteer for this DT, please. My SOI is at https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Martin+Boyle+SOI. Thanks Martin From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Duchesneau, Stephanie Sent: 10 March 2015 17:38 To: 'jrobinson@afilias.info'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs Hi Jonathan, I would like to be participate on Design Team B. My SOI can be found below. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Duchesneau+SOI Thank you. Stephanie Stephanie Duchesneau Neustar, Inc. / Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2623 Mobile: +1.703.731.2040 Fax: +1.202.533.2623 / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/> ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message. From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 5:44 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs All, As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue. As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure: For Design Team B: * two or three ccTLD representatives * one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: * At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One IANA staff member (current or former) * One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA's current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT. The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership. Thanks, Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: 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
My apologies. Had meant to refer to design team C, on the CSC. Mind is spinning a bit between working groups/parties/streams, design teams etc. Best, Stephanie Stephanie Duchesneau Neustar, Inc. / Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2623 Mobile: +1.703.731.2040 Fax: +1.202.533.2623 / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/> ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message. From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Duchesneau, Stephanie Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 12:38 PM To: 'jrobinson@afilias.info'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs Hi Jonathan, I would like to be participate on Design Team B. My SOI can be found below. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Duchesneau+SOI<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_gnsosoi_Stephanie-26-2343-3BDuchesneau-26-2343-3BSOI&d=AwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=0hsxJJjdrXRgjayVdcz_CARI78PKqWTRtnf4a8uMAWU&m=hzzBmxpQaKYkKRXT2537hLF1N71eFAOB2H-mglE0EuE&s=aZzbfPdYTtCk9dRiD0AchL24iRPYIVG3p-e-fwH53Yo&e=> Thank you. Stephanie Stephanie Duchesneau Neustar, Inc. / Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2623 Mobile: +1.703.731.2040 Fax: +1.202.533.2623 / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/> ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message. From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 5:44 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs All, As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue. As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure: For Design Team B: * two or three ccTLD representatives * one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: * At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One IANA staff member (current or former) * One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA's current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT. The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership. Thanks, Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: 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
I would also like to volunteer for design team C on the CSC. My SOI is at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Sarah+Falvey+SOI On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Duchesneau, Stephanie < Stephanie.Duchesneau@neustar.us> wrote:
My apologies. Had meant to refer to design team C, on the CSC. Mind is spinning a bit between working groups/parties/streams, design teams etc.
Best,
Stephanie
*Stephanie Duchesneau* *Neustar, Inc. / *Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 *Office:* +1.202.533.2623 *Mobile: *+1.703.731.2040 *Fax: * +1.202.533.2623 */* www.neustar.biz ------------------------------
The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Duchesneau, Stephanie *Sent:* Tuesday, March 10, 2015 12:38 PM *To:* 'jrobinson@afilias.info'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org
*Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs
Hi Jonathan,
I would like to be participate on Design Team B. My SOI can be found below.
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Duchesneau+SOI <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>
Thank you.
Stephanie
*Stephanie Duchesneau* *Neustar, Inc. / *Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 *Office:* +1.202.533.2623 *Mobile: *+1.703.731.2040 *Fax: * +1.202.533.2623 */* www.neustar.biz ------------------------------
The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.
*From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org <cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Jonathan Robinson *Sent:* Tuesday, March 10, 2015 5:44 AM *To:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs
All,
As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue.
As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure:
For Design Team B:
- two or three ccTLD representatives - one or two GAC representatives.
For Design Team C:
- At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements - At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements - One IANA staff member (current or former) - One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements - One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA’s current responsibilities
As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT.
The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership.
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:* Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info <jrobinson@afilias.info>] *Sent:* 09 March 2015 21:50 *To:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* 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
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- Sarah Falvey | Policy Manager | sarahfalvey@google.com | 202-346-1230
Note that the target for DT-C is two RySG reps and that includes Donna who is Lead so it may be that one of you will be asked to join a different DT. Chuck From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Sarah Falvey Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 4:16 PM To: Duchesneau, Stephanie Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs I would also like to volunteer for design team C on the CSC. My SOI is at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Sarah+Falvey+SOI On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Duchesneau, Stephanie <Stephanie.Duchesneau@neustar.us<mailto:Stephanie.Duchesneau@neustar.us>> wrote: My apologies. Had meant to refer to design team C, on the CSC. Mind is spinning a bit between working groups/parties/streams, design teams etc. Best, Stephanie Stephanie Duchesneau Neustar, Inc. / Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2623<tel:%2B1.202.533.2623> Mobile: +1.703.731.2040<tel:%2B1.703.731.2040> Fax: +1.202.533.2623<tel:%2B1.202.533.2623> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/> ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message. From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Duchesneau, Stephanie Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 12:38 PM To: 'jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs Hi Jonathan, I would like to be participate on Design Team B. My SOI can be found below. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Duchesneau+SOI<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_gnsosoi_Stephanie-26-2343-3BDuchesneau-26-2343-3BSOI&d=AwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=0hsxJJjdrXRgjayVdcz_CARI78PKqWTRtnf4a8uMAWU&m=hzzBmxpQaKYkKRXT2537hLF1N71eFAOB2H-mglE0EuE&s=aZzbfPdYTtCk9dRiD0AchL24iRPYIVG3p-e-fwH53Yo&e=> Thank you. Stephanie Stephanie Duchesneau Neustar, Inc. / Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2623<tel:%2B1.202.533.2623> Mobile: +1.703.731.2040<tel:%2B1.703.731.2040> Fax: +1.202.533.2623<tel:%2B1.202.533.2623> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/> ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message. From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 5:44 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs All, As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue. As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure: For Design Team B: * two or three ccTLD representatives * one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: * At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One IANA staff member (current or former) * One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA’s current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT. The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership. Thanks, Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: 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 _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship -- Sarah Falvey | Policy Manager | sarahfalvey@google.com<mailto:sarahfalvey@google.com> | 202-346-1230
Just to correct my mistake: I would like to volunteer for DT-C, the Design Team on the CSC. Apologies. Martin From: Martin Boyle Sent: 10 March 2015 16:50 To: 'Duchesneau, Stephanie'; 'jrobinson@afilias.info'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org; 'Lise Fuhr' Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs Hi Jonathan & Lise, I would also like to volunteer for this DT, please. My SOI is at https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Martin+Boyle+SOI. Thanks Martin From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Duchesneau, Stephanie Sent: 10 March 2015 17:38 To: 'jrobinson@afilias.info'; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs Hi Jonathan, I would like to be participate on Design Team B. My SOI can be found below. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Duchesneau+SOI Thank you. Stephanie Stephanie Duchesneau Neustar, Inc. / Public Policy Manager 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2623 Mobile: +1.703.731.2040 Fax: +1.202.533.2623 / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/> ________________________________ The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message. From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 5:44 AM To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs All, As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue. As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure: For Design Team B: * two or three ccTLD representatives * one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: * At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One IANA staff member (current or former) * One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA's current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT. The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership. Thanks, Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: 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
Hi Jonathon: I volunteer for the CSC Design Team (Group C). My SOI can be found at https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Kurt+Pritz+SOI. Please let me know if I can provide additional information. Regards, Kurt On Mar 10, 2015, at 2:43 AM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue.
As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure:
For Design Team B: two or three ccTLD representatives one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements One IANA staff member (current or former) One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA’s current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT.
The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership.
Thanks,
Jonathan
From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: 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
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
Re Design Team C: CSC Please find link to my SOI as requested by Jonathan in mail below. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Staffan+Jonson+SOI With best regards Staffan Staffan Jonson Senior Policy Adviser .SE (The Internet Infrastructure foundation) BOX 7399 | SE-103 91 STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN Tel. +46 8 452 35 74 | SMS: +46 73 317 39 67 staffan.jonson@iis.se twitter: @staffanjonson LinkedIn: se.linkedin.com/pub/staffan-jonson/4/574/a16/ Från: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] För Jonathan Robinson Skickat: den 10 mars 2015 10:44 Till: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Ämne: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs All, As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue. As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure: For Design Team B: * two or three ccTLD representatives * one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: * At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One IANA staff member (current or former) * One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA's current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT. The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership. Thanks, Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: 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
My SOI below: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Donna+Austin+SOI Thanks Donna From: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Staffan Jonson Sent: Wednesday, 11 March 2015 8:36 AM To: jrobinson@afilias.info; cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs Re Design Team C: CSC Please find link to my SOI as requested by Jonathan in mail below. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Staffan+Jonson+SOI With best regards Staffan Staffan Jonson Senior Policy Adviser .SE (The Internet Infrastructure foundation) BOX 7399 | SE-103 91 STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN Tel. +46 8 452 35 74 | SMS: +46 73 317 39 67 staffan.jonson@iis.se<mailto:staffan.jonson@iis.se> twitter: @staffanjonson LinkedIn: se.linkedin.com/pub/staffan-jonson/4/574/a16/ Från: cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] För Jonathan Robinson Skickat: den 10 mars 2015 10:44 Till: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Ämne: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs All, As an additional clarification, please note that DT-A, B and C have now been approved by the co-chairs, with a slight modification to the scope of DT-C, i.e. the removal of consideration of the authorization function since a separate DT will be dealing with that issue. As such, the co-chairs would welcome expressions of interest as soon as possible for members of DT-B and DT-C taking into account the membership structure: For Design Team B: * two or three ccTLD representatives * one or two GAC representatives. For Design Team C: * At a minimum two gTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * At a minimum two ccTLD registry representatives with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One IANA staff member (current or former) * One non-direct customer representative with operational knowledge of IANA Functions and current reporting requirements * One liaison from NTIA to verify NTIA's current responsibilities As noted previously, members of design teams are expected to make the necessary time available to complete the tasks of the design team as well as having the necessary skills and expertise as identified in the proposed membership structure. Those interest to volunteer for a DT are expected to share their expression of interest with the CWG mailing list which is expected to include their Statement of Interest (SOI) or provide a link to the existing SOI as well as their qualification for the DT. The co-chairs in consultation with the DT lead, will review the volunteers that have come forward and determine the membership of the DT, ensuring sufficient expertise and a balanced membership. Thanks, Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Subject: 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
All, I have a detail suggestion on the membership of DTs. I suggest that we consider the lead as a member and not as an additional "neutral" chair. e.g. if the DT is nominally composed of a specific number of representatives from a particular group, then the lead will count as one of the representatives of his or her group. The rationale being that the lead is (almost by definition) someone who has an interest in the topic and therefore (possibly) a specific outcome. Whilst a degree of neutrality is required in order to ensure that the voices of the members are heard and accounted for, the lead is not per se neutral. As ever, any concerns or issues, flag them. Otherwise, we'll run with this approach. Jonathan From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: 09 March 2015 21:50 To: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: 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
Hello Jonathan, I also agree with your suggestion based on the rationale. That said, i came in late during the call today (on audio only), during the AOB i noticed you did not really address the suggestion raised by Avri about setting a timeline for reports (you mentioned its desired but may not be reasonable). Although i don't know if the reports referred to by Avri includes the DT outcomes, but i think it will be good to set a deadline/timeline for the emerging DTs. I understand that the CWG co-chairs may not be the best to set such timeline since it does not depend on them, however i think they should encourage the DT members to set an expected timeline for their activity. It is just important we have that going forward...it will be good for us to have an idea of fast when we said the "DTs are expected to be agile in their work". Cheers! On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
I have a detail suggestion on the membership of DTs. I suggest that we consider the lead as a member and not as an additional “neutral” chair.
e.g. if the DT is nominally composed of a specific number of representatives from a particular group, then the lead will count as one of the representatives of his or her group.
The rationale being that the lead is (almost by definition) someone who has an interest in the topic and therefore (possibly) a specific outcome.
Whilst a degree of neutrality is required in order to ensure that the voices of the members are heard and accounted for, the lead is not *per se* neutral.
As ever, any concerns or issues, flag them. Otherwise, we’ll run with this approach.
Jonathan
*From:* Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] *Sent:* 09 March 2015 21:50 *To:* cwg-stewardship@icann.org *Subject:* 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
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* The key to understanding is humility - my view !
participants (9)
-
Donna Austin -
Duchesneau, Stephanie -
Gomes, Chuck -
Jonathan Robinson -
Kurt Pritz -
Martin Boyle -
Sarah Falvey -
Seun Ojedeji -
Staffan Jonson