- IPC-GNSO - lists.icann.org

ICANN Blog on Opening ICANN Blogs for Comment
by Greg Shatan Nov. 6, 2015

Nov. 6, 2015

Opening ICANN Blogs for Comment <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/opening-icann-blogs-for-comment#> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/opening-icann-blogs-for-comment#> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/opening-icann-blogs-for-comment#> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/opening-icann-blogs-for-comment#> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/opening-icann-blogs-for-comment#> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/opening-icann-blogs-for-comment#> ICANN blogs ought to be one of the key tools to provide a wider understanding of ICANN's role and work as well as an accessible entry point for community newcomers to understand what is happening and why. There's work to do on the presentation and organization of the blogging platform and we're thinking about what steps we can take. But the most obvious function of a blog is as a discursive platform. So we're going to let the conversation flow and open up comments on our ICANN blogs. It's not a technical triumph, but it is a minor gamble with our resources. No organization wants to spend time monitoring the behavior of its community, but we assume that the courtesy and respect you wish for yourself will be given to others. As such, we will rely on post-moderation. Comments are posted immediately and we review them once they are live. The Expected Standards of Behavior Policy is the same for the wider organization <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2012-05-15-en>. View our website Terms of Service <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/tos-2014-06-13-en>. With comments now open, we hope blog posts can open up useful exchanges between community members and the blog authors. Of course, if you have any thoughts, you can post them below.

1 0

IPC Website & IPC Website Team
by Greg Shatan Nov. 5, 2015

Nov. 5, 2015

All, I am pleased to announce that ICANN will be giving funding to the IPC (and other Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies) to completely redevelop (and then maintain) the IPC website. We will be using a platform called Memberclicks (http://www.memberclicks.com/) which is designed for small associations and member non-profits, and offers website and membership management tools, as well as a number of other relevant features. Additional information is in the attached PDF. This will be a significant project, which makes this a good time to look for more volunteers to augment our current IPC Website Team (Marc Trachtenberg, John McElwaine, Claudio DiGangi and Colin O'Brien, along with our Secretariat Chantelle Doerksen). If you would like to join the IPC Website Team and play a major role in the first complete redevelopment of the IPC website in several years, along with the initiation of powerful membership and management tools, please respond to this email. Thanks! Greg

2 1

Fwd: [Soac-infoalert] Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions - ICANN
by Greg Shatan Nov. 3, 2015

Nov. 3, 2015

FYI. Greg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org> Date: Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 4:06 AM Subject: [Soac-infoalert] Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions - ICANN To: "soac-infoalert(a)icann.org" <soac-infoalert(a)icann.org> Cc: David Cake <dave(a)difference.com.au>, ASO Chairs < aso-chairs(a)aso.icann.org> https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-dis… Volume 11: An Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-dis…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-dis…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-dis…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-dis…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-dis…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/volume-11-an-update-on-iana-stewardship-dis…> Following ICANN54, the IANA Stewardship Transition is now a step closer The ICG and CCWG-Accountability met in Dublin during ICANN54 <https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54> to continue work on their proposals in wake of the feedback received during the two public comment periods that ended in September. The ICG was successful in completing its Consolidated IANA Stewardship Proposal and is now awaiting the finalization of the CCWG-Accountability’s Work Stream 1 Recommendations. When CCWG-Accountability finalizes its Work Stream 1 recommendations, and the CWG-Stewardship confirms that the recommendations meet its requirements, the ICG can consider its proposal complete and begin the process of submitting it to the NTIA. Consolidated IANA Stewardship Proposal Taking into account an analysis of the public comments <https://www.dropbox.com/s/j07zo4malyc2sx6/Public%20Comment%20Summary%20-%20…> received during the public comment period <https://www.ianacg.org/calls-for-input/combined-proposal-public-comment-per…> that ended on 8 September 2015, and after a number of working sessions <https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule-table?combine=ICG> during ICANN54 <https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54> in Dublin, the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG <http://www.ianacg.org>) has announced <https://www.ianacg.org/icg-completes-its-work-and-awaits-conclusion-of-ccwg…> that it has finalized its proposal <http://www.ianacg.org/icg-files/documents/IANA-transition-proposal-v9.pdf>. However, before the ICG sends the proposal to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/>) via the ICANN Board, it will first confirm with the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/CWG+to+Develop+an+IAN…>) that its accountability requirements have been met by Work Stream 1 recommendations currently being finalized by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/CCWG+on+Enhancing+ICANN+A…>).The ICG has decided to keep its mailing lists active until 30 September 2016 to enable the community to continue to contact them, if needed. It is also seeking feedback from the three IANA operational communities (names, numbers and protocol parameters) to see if they would like ICG to play a role during the implementation of the IANA Stewardship Transition. The ICG will not hold any more face-to-face meetings and will only hold conference calls on an as-needed basis. There are still some implementation details to be finalized for the transition, including the issue of the IANA trademark and intellectual property rights (IPR). The CWG-Stewardship will work with the two other operational communities to find a solution to the IPR issue that meets the needs of all three communities. CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 1 Recommendations Following the 12 September end of the public comment period <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-2015-08-03-en> for the 2nd Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-draft-2-proposal-work-stre…>, the CCWG-Accountability held a face-to-face meeting <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-2015-08-03-en>, 25-26 September, in Los Angeles, and a number of working sessions <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56134263> in Dublin during ICANN54. As a result of its work to incorporate the feedback from the community, including feedback from the ICANN Board, the CCWG-Accountability made a number of adjustments and refinements to its draft recommendations. As a result of the adjustments, the CCWG-Accountability has decided to send the revised recommendations for a third public comment period. The third comment period will have a two-stage approach so the community can begin reviewing the materials as soon as possible. This is to enable the report on Work Stream 1 recommendations to be finalized and sent to the ICANN Board by mid January 2016, ensuring there are minimal effects on the timeline of the IANA Stewardship Transition. Key dates *15 Nov 2015* A high-level overview of Work Stream 1 Recommendations and a summary of changes from the 2nd Draft Proposal to be: 1. Released for a 35-day public comment period 2. Sent to the CCWG-Accountability’s Chartering Organizations for their feedback *30 Nov 2015* Full third draft report on Work Stream 1 Recommendations released for 20 days of consultation *Early Jan 2016* Amended report submitted to Chartering Organizations *Mid Jan 2016* Potential face-to-face meeting for Chartering Organizations, if needed, to decide whether to support the report *Mid Jan 2016* CCWG-Accountability to submit final report to the ICANN Board, enabling the ICG to also submit its final report For more information on the amendments that the CCWG-Accountability decided to pursue in Dublin, see the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability ICANN54 co-Chairs' Statement <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/Cross%20Community%20Working%20Group%20on%20…> . IANA Stewardship Transition in the news 27 Oct 2015 Governments v. ICANN: The Last Battle Before the IANA Transition <http://blogs.cfr.org/cyber/2015/10/27/governments-v-icann-the-last-battle-b…>, Council on Foreign Relations [EN] 23 Oct 2015 ICANN and IANA: Making the right – not a rash – decision <https://www.aei.org/publication/icann-and-iana-making-the-right-not-a-rash-…>, American Enterprise Institute [EN] 13 Oct 2015 Perché 40 mila ore di lavoro non sono bastate a trovare un accordo sul futuro di Internet senza la guida USA <http://www.chefuturo.it/2015/10/accordo-futuro-internet-usa/>, CheFuturo! [IT] 29 Sep 2015 IANA-Aufgabe durch USA weiter unter Zeitdruck: Auf Messers Schneide <http://www.heise.de/netze/meldung/IANA-Aufgabe-durch-USA-weiter-unter-Zeitd…>, Heise [DE] You can play a role in IANA’s future… *Anyone can participate in discussions about the future of IANA's stewardship and ICANN accountability. For information on joining CCWG-Accountability, contact **accountability-staff(a)icann.org* <accountability-staff(a)icann.org>*.* *Compiled on behalf of ICANN by Samantha Dickinson | 2 November 2015* Details - ICANN Blog - Author: Samantha Dickinson - 02 Nov 2015 David A. Olive Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul Hakki Yeten Cad. Selenium Plaza No:10/C K:10 34349 Fulya, Besiktas, Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.999.6212 Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611 Mobile: +90.533.341.6550 Email: david.olive(a)icann.org www.icann.org _______________________________________________ soac-infoalert mailing list soac-infoalert(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-infoalert

1 0

20 October 2015 - IPC Open Meeting: Transcription & Presentations
by Chantelle Doerksen Nov. 2, 2015

Nov. 2, 2015

Dear all, Attached are the transcript and presentations from the IPC's Open Meeting in Dublin for your review. To listen to the mp3 recording, please visit the ICANN Public Meeting link: https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/tue-ipc. Please let me know if there are any questions. Kind regards, Chantelle ________________ Chantelle Doerksen Secretariat Support CSG: BC, IPC, and ISPCP Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: chantelle.doerksen(a)icann.org Skype: chantelle.doerksen.icann Tel.: +1.775.253.5756

1 0

Fwd: IPC Comments on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report
by Greg Shatan Oct. 30, 2015

Oct. 30, 2015

Fellow IPC Members, I have attached the comments of the IPC on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report, just submitted to the ICANN Public Comment Forum. Thank you to Kiran Malancharuvil for taking the lead on this comment, to Brian Winterfeldt, David Einhorn, Griffin Barnett, John McElwaine, Micheal Graham, Steve Metalitz and Susan Payne for their work on the comment team, and to Claudio DiGangi, Hector Manoff, Marie-Emmanuelle Haas, Anne Aikman-Scalese and Jeff Neuman for their comments on the list. Chantelle, please post this to the Public Statements section of the IPC website. Greg Shatan IPC President ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> Date: Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 4:16 PM Subject: IPC Comments on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report To: comments-new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-31aug15(a)icann.org Attached please find the Intellectual Property Constituency's comment on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report. Respectfully Submitted, Greg Shatan President, IPC

1 0

IPC CCWG Scorecard (was: Updated Timeline for CCWG-Accountability)
by Greg Shatan Oct. 29, 2015

Oct. 29, 2015

Anne and all, In the interests of time and communication, I've thrown together a quick scorecard based on the list Anne extracted and posted it to Google Drive. With more work, I can make the references to the current CCWG position more specific, but this is my quick and dirty view of the CCWG's progress against our "asks." The link comes with "suggest and comment" rights, so please do. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h89jwkxxsm6YHHl63soQOTuLfvWMqT_wX1M5FFp… I've also attached a Word copy for the Google Drive-challenged. Greg On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Anne, > > That's quite a scorecard. I'll have to think about it. I may turn it > into a chart for easy reading. > > I'd be interested in views from you and Jonathan Zuck, as other IPC folk > most active in the CCWG. > > Greg > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman(a)lrrlaw.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Greg, >> >> My understanding of the Chartering Organization approval process is that >> in the CCWG-Accountability Charter, there is a provision contemplating a >> possible Supplemental Report if any recommendation is not wholeheartedly >> approved by a particular Chartering Organization and that the Chartering >> Organizations may be able to make additional recommendations in this >> regard. Is that your understanding? >> >> >> >> I was curious as to what you think about how the items IPC requested in >> public comment in September will be incorporated in the Accountability >> Report. The list from the end of our public comment on the Second Draft >> Report appears below. (At least I think this is the version that was >> filed.) Do you have a sense as to how far we got with these public >> comments? >> >> >> >> “In particular, in its Final Report, the CCWG should incorporate the IPC >> recommendations embodied in the above comments in order to: >> >> (a) confirm that contractual enforcement is a core responsibility within >> the ICANN mission and clarify that such enforcement is consistent with >> ICANN’s “limited technical mission”[1] >> <#150b4e41dcf6f48f_150b4bd6970253f6__ftn1>, >> >> (b) either delete the proposed Bylaws Amendment on Human Rights or >> embrace all Human Rights listed in the UN Convention, >> >> (c) reinstate the requirement to balance Commitments and Core Values, >> >> (d) make certain that AoC Reviews (and particularly the commitment at >> para. 566) are part of the Fundamental Bylaws and make certain all >> constituencies, including the IPC, are directly represented on the Review >> Teams, >> >> (e) clarify that the recommended changes in structure do not affect AoC >> reviews currently in progress, >> >> (f) adjust voting weight in the Single Member Model to more accurately >> reflect community interests, including intellectual property interests, >> >> (g) provide a method for challenging Board decisions even where the >> majority does not support such a challenge, >> >> (h) retain Stress Test 18 regarding GAC consensus advice, >> >> (i) delete Stress Tests 29 and 30 as they are contrary to the concept >> that robust contractual enforcement is a key part of ICANN’s mission, >> >> (j) provide for interim remedies available to the Community pending a >> reconsideration or IRP which suspends implementation by the Board of a >> “captured” policy, and >> >> (k) deal with the possibility that the exercise of a Community Power may >> also be “captured” and provides a remedy for that situation.” >> >> >> >> >> >> Thank you, >> >> Anne >> >> >> >> *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel* >> >> *Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP* >> >> *One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611* >> >> *(T) 520.629.4428 <520.629.4428> | (F) 520.879.4725 <520.879.4725>* >> >> *AAikman(a)lrrlaw.com <AAikman(a)lrrlaw.com>** | www.LRRLaw.com >> <http://www.lrrlaw.com/>* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* ipc-gnso-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:ipc-gnso-bounces@icann.org] *On >> Behalf Of *Greg Shatan >> *Sent:* Thursday, October 29, 2015 6:52 AM >> *To:* IPC-GNSO >> *Subject:* Re: [IPC-GNSO] Updated Timeline for CCWG-Accountability >> >> >> >> This time, with the attachment. >> >> >> >> Greg >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> All, >> >> >> >> Attached please find the latest version of the timeline for the >> completion of the CCWG's work. >> >> >> >> We should consider how we will work within these timelines, both with >> regard to providing public comments and with regard to our role in the >> Chartering Organization approval process within the GNSO. >> >> >> >> Greg >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> [1] <#150b4e41dcf6f48f_150b4bd6970253f6__ftnref1> Alternatively, the >> CCWG could simply eliminate references to the “limited technical mission” >> of ICANN. >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the >> individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this >> message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or >> agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended >> recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or >> copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you >> have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by >> replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any >> attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and >> confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the >> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. >> > >

1 0

Updated Timeline for CCWG-Accountability
by Greg Shatan Oct. 29, 2015

Oct. 29, 2015

All, Attached please find the latest version of the timeline for the completion of the CCWG's work. We should consider how we will work within these timelines, both with regard to providing public comments and with regard to our role in the Chartering Organization approval process within the GNSO. Greg

3 5

Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability ICANN54 co-Chairs Statement
by Greg Shatan Oct. 22, 2015

Oct. 22, 2015

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Hillary Jett <hillary.jett(a)icann.org> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:47 PM Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability ICANN54 co-Chairs Statement To: CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> Hi everyone, Please find below the statement presented by León at today’s Public Forum on the progress made on the Enhancing ICANN Accountability process during ICANN54 in Dublin. Thanks, Hillary Original posting: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/cross-community-working-group-on-enhancing-… Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability ICANN54 co-Chairs' Statement <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/cross-community-working-group-on-enhancing-…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/cross-community-working-group-on-enhancing-…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/cross-community-working-group-on-enhancing-…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/cross-community-working-group-on-enhancing-…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/cross-community-working-group-on-enhancing-…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/cross-community-working-group-on-enhancing-…> *Presented at ICANN54 Public Forum by León Sanchez:* Members and participants of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) met in Dublin, Ireland from 16-22 October 2015 at ICANN54. Over the past seven days, the CCWG-Accountability has held more than 25 hours of formal meetings, with additional discussions taking place in various SO-AC-led sessions, in the hallways and often times over meals and drinks. After some voiced concerns with the speed of progress leading into Dublin, we as co-Chairs, called on the community for full mobilization and reinvigorated dedication to making measurable progress over the week in Dublin. We are extremely pleased to announce that the community tackled this challenge head on and succeeded. In what the group has coined “an environment of collaboration,” CCWG-Accountability members, participants, ICANN Board Directors, external Advisors, legal counsel and interested observers came together to identify outstanding issues in the 2nd Draft Report and moved towards consensus on solutions. A summary of key decisions and agreed-upon next steps are outlined below: *Sole Designator as Reference for Enforcement * The group reached broad agreement to move forward with the Sole Designator as the new reference enforcement model for the next draft proposal. The group will next attempt to finalize "patching" the model to alleviate any outstanding concerns on their next draft proposal. *Decision-Making Model* The group begun defining a consensus based decision-making model, which includes a community consultation period. Discussions on the topic were informed by concerns raised in the Public Comment on the 2nd Draft Report about unintended concentrations of power. *Independent Review Process* The group confirmed support for the proposed IRP enhancements, and is now moving into the implementation phase. To spearhead this phase, a drafting sub-group with expert support will be constructed to develop and draft bylaws and detailed operating procedures. *Community Power: Review/Reject Budget and Operating Plan* The group has identified a balanced process and approach for the One-Year Operating Plan and Budget, which was an outstanding item coming into Dublin. *Community Power: Recall Individual Board Directors* The group confirmed a decision method for removal of a director appointed by the Nominating Committee, and a separate decision method for removal of a director appointed by an Advisory Committee or Supporting Organization. *Mission and Core Values* The group confirmed its support for a clarification of the Mission Statement and articulation of the Commitments and Core Values. An example of a clarification includes ICANN's ability to enforce agreements with contracted parties, subject to reasonable checks and balances. *Human Rights* The group reached consensus to include a general human rights commitment into the Bylaws. However, further work is needed on language and has been tasked to the Human Rights Working Party. *Incorporation of the Affirmation of Commitments into the Bylaws* The group finalized outstanding details of the incorporation of the Affirmation of Commitments Review into the bylaws. There is high confidence that these bylaws are nearly ready for consideration in terms of implementation. *Work Stream 2 * The group adopted a focused list of Work Stream 2 items, with an emphasis on transparency requirements. There was also broad agreement to bring some of these transparency requirements into Work Stream 1 in consideration of the discussions around the Sole Designator enforcement model. Timeline and Next Steps The CCWG-Accountability has had intensive discussions on the group's work plan, anticipated progress and next steps towards finalization. As such, the group has adjusted its timeline in a manner that attempts to balance the various timeline constraints, both inside and outside of the community. While details are still being solidified, the timeline is rigorous, and will likely keep the CCWG-Accountability busy through January. However, the co-Chairs, members and participants of the CCWG-Accountability understand the importance of and will execute an inclusive, open and bottom-up process. The current timeline proposes posting a high-level overview of recommendations and a summary of changes from the 2nd Draft Proposal for a 35-day public comment on 15 November 2015. Alongside the 35-day public comment, the CCWG-Accountability will submit these resources to the Chartering Organizations for initial feedback. The CCWG-Accountability plans to issue a full detailed report, including annexes and in-depth documentation, mid-way into the public comment period for roughly 20 days of consultation. After synthesis of the comments received, and assuming no major changes, the group currently projects submission of Work Stream 1 Recommendations to the ICANN Board in late January 2016. We sincerely thank the community for their dedication to our unprecedented goal. We'd like to give special recognition to the GAC, ALAC, ASO and SSAC for their comments on our proposal while in Dublin. In addition, we are grateful to the volunteers, support staff, Advisors and independent counsel who put in a tremendous effort this past week. They deserve and have earned the community's greatest respect and the deepest recognition. *CCWG-Accountability co-Chairs* Thomas Rickert Leon Sanchez Mathieu Weill -- *Hillary Jett* Communications Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +1 (202) 674-3403 Email: hillary.jett(a)icann.org _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

1 0

Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] Statement from the operational communities at the ICANN Public Forum
by Greg Shatan Oct. 22, 2015

Oct. 22, 2015

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:28 PM Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Statement from the operational communities at the ICANN Public Forum To: "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org> Dear all, Please find below the statement made by Lise at the ICANN Public Forum. She was joined at the microphone by the leaders from the other operational communities. As part of the IANA Stewardship transition process, each Operational Community—protocol parameters, numbers, names — has been working to develop their proposals and to plan for the transition. But there are some areas where we have had to coordinate. For instance, the communities have worked together in the area of IPR for IANA Trademark and "IANA.ORG" domain. I want to convey a message from the all chairs of the IANA Stewardship Transition working groups from the names, the protocols and the numbers: we have collaborated and continue to collaborate to ensure the consistency of the transition effort. We are now nearing the implementation stage of the effort, and the three operational communities are committed to working together to develop an implementation plan based on our proposal for the IPR, and any other areas in the proposal which need coordination among the three operational communities. _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship

1 0

Vice chair
by McGrady, Paul D. Oct. 22, 2015

Oct. 22, 2015

IPC Leadership: What's the plan for our (interim?) vice chair? No doubt it will come up in today's wrap up session. Sent from my iPhone The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. Therefore, if this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author.

6 7