<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:rtc="http://microsoft.com/officenet/conferencing" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:Repl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/" xmlns:mt="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/meetings/" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ppda="http://www.passport.com/NameSpace.xsd" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcs="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/soap" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:udcp2p="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/parttopart" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:dsss="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig-setup" xmlns:dssi="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig" xmlns:mdssi="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/digital-signature" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:spwp="http://microsoft.com/sharepoint/webpartpages" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:pptsl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/SlideLibrary/" xmlns:spsl="http://microsoft.com/webservices/SharePointPortalServer/PublishedLinksService" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<base href="x-msg://168/">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.apple-tab-span
{mso-style-name:apple-tab-span;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;-webkit-line-break: after-white-space'>
<div class=WordSection1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I respectfully disagree. In Brussels, you yourself chose
not to participate in the review of the proposals of the various management
consultants because you felt that as Board chair, it might not be appropriate
for you to be involved in that selection. Whatever the merits of that
view, there is little question that there are very real concerns that apply to
the Board’s attempting to, or being seen to, intervene to shape or limit
the work of the review team. I understand the Board’s valid role in
ensuring that the dollars spent are reasonable but I have previously indicated
how the Board can (and already should have) resolved that issue without getting
involved in intervening in the specific scope of work to be performed. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Your argument that the Board has a role in determining what is
called for under the AoC would apply with equal force to myself as the other
signatory to the Affirmation. But rather than turning this into a debate
between ICANN and the US over the interpretation of the AoC, it makes much more
sense simply to recognize the autonomy of the review team and to allow it to
proceed as it best sees fit. This conclusion is further buttressed by the
fact that it has been over four weeks since the review team determined to
contract with Berkman and the papers still are not done, thus jeopardizing the
team’s ability to complete its review in the time allowed under the AoC.
I strongly recommend that we get on with this engagement without further delay.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Peter Dengate
Thrush [mailto:peter.dengatethrush@icann.org] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 19, 2010 2:19 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Larry Strickling<br>
<b>Cc:</b> at-review@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [AT-Review] ATRT budget<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;color:black'>Hi Larry, all<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I don't quite understand this approach.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The board's role is to make sure that the review it gets
from its independent review team meets ICANN's obligations under the AoC.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The Review Team is accountable to ICANN for the proper
conduct of the review.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The board acts as the manager of that accountability, being
ultimately responsible for ICANN commitments and duties. Not to hold any of the
Review Teams to account for the scope of its review is a breach of the board's
duty.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>In this case the board WG has asked questions to determine
that the proper things are being reviewed, and that their cost is reasonable.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The Berkman scope question is one that also perplexes me a
little.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The AoC ( 9.1) commits ICANN to maintaining and improving
robust mechanisms for public input, accountability and transparency.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>It then specifically commits to:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Continually assessing and improving the board.....<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Assessing the role and effectiveness of the GAC...<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Continually assessing and improving the public input
processes...<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Continually assessing the public support for ICANN
decisions...and <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Assessing the PDP.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Obviously, these are all processes, that ICANN has committed
to performing.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The review is of the execution of those processes.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>At its narrowest, the review needs to ascertain details of
the assessment processes put in place to meet those commitments, and then form
a view about their efficacy in meeting the stated purposes, which are to have
accountable decisions, made in the public interest.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The Board WG's questions include - by what measures will
ICANN's own efforts at its assessments be measured?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Take the Board self-assessment as an example.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Its not yet clear by what standard the efficacy of that
process will be tested.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>In relation to Berkman, its proposal seems directed at none
of the questions to be reviewed, but rather seeks to answer its own questions,
which it poses in its introduction;<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Despite these efforts and
improvements, ICANN arguably continues<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>to have problems making
decisions that the global Internet community can support.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>These perceived issues involve
internal factors – how ICANN’s decision-making<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>mechanisms have developed in
response to its own internal processes and external<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>feedback – and external
factors – how stakeholders communicate with ICANN and<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>respond to subsequent
decisions, all of which occur within the context of ICANN’s<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>unique institutional approach.
The proposed exploratory study will develop a framework<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>and methodology to analyze and
understand this situation, ideally laying the groundwork<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>for ICANN to address it
realistically and effectively.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Given that the Review is of ICANN performance of its
commitment to continually assess and improve itself, its striking that none of
the Berkman language is directed at reviewing anything along those lines at
all.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Berkman seems to be rather addressing the issue of "Is
ICANN Accountable and if Not, How Could we Make it So". While that is a
fascinating study, its not the proper subject of this review.The board
questions are based on ensuring that money is spent pursuing the Review goals.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I think the RFP that Berkman answered sets out the questions
for review very fairly.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>What may have caused the widening away from the topic of
review ( "how well is ICANN doing assessing and improving itself on those
topics) to the whole topic of "Is ICANN transparent and accountable"
are the sets of very general questions posed by the Team to the Community; eg<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>1.<span
class=apple-tab-span> </span>Do
you think ICANN is accountable to all stakeholders? Can you identify a specific
example(s) when ICANN did not act in an accountable manner?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The Berkman results may nevertheless be very useful to the
Review Team if they can be properly integrated into the main thrust of the
Review - how well is ICANN doing in continually assessing and improving in the
areas it has committed to.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Clearly, if, for example, the enquiry is in to how well
ICANN is assessing and improving public support for its decisions, a case study
into the decision not to proceed with the EoI might well be useful in that
review. What is also clear though, is that Berkman is not doing the Review -
having expressly eschewed that task.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Its not clear to me how a review of things that occurred
before the AoC can be useful into a review of performance against the AoC
commitments. I accept that they might provide a back drop against which an
issue can be seen more clearly - but that raises the cost question. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Nor is it clear that the outputs from Berkman are being
tailored to fit such a need.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Berkman says it will:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>.....develop an exploratory
model (or<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>“framework”) intended
to help examine the various factors that shape the perceived<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>legitimacy of ICANN and its
decision-making processes and to make visible the interplay<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>among these variables (such as
structure, procedures, information flows, etc.)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>That seems to be a different output that assembling cases
studies of ICANN performance against commitments.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Likewise<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>The diagnostic model will
include a taxonomy of issues and challenges identified in<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>phases 1 and 2. Basic
categories of the envisioned taxonomy are 1) foundational – based<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>on the question of legitimacy
and the perception that the wrong people are making the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>decisions<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>seems to be a fundamental review of ICANN itself, and its
structure - not the subject of review.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Then, having set up questions that are not asked, they
propose to answer them:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>we will propose a series of
concrete, future-oriented recommendations in response<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>to the challenges and problems
identified in the earlier phases of the project<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>and later, by providing a report<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> with a series of working
hypotheses that<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>explain the persistence of the
critiques regarding the transparency, efficacy and<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>accountability of ICANN
decision-making processes and provides a series of<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-style-span><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>recommendations.</span></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>So, the question was fairly put to the Team - how is this
work related to the Review team's work?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The WG has expressly acknowledged the effort and
independence of the ATRT. There is ( very properly) no challenge to the ability
of the Team to set up its own measures, use it own tools, employ the
contractors of its own choosing etc etc. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Brian's ( very good) response very properly highlights the
benefits of case studies to the Review.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I don't think its unfair for the Team's response to the
Board WG to also deal with these other features of the Berkman proposal, and to
confirm that those things are also sought by the Team, and why.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>That will allow the Board WG to make a recommendation, and
for this work to begin.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>regards<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Peter<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> On Jul 19, 2010, at 2:25 AM, Larry Strickling wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>I do not believe it is appropriate for the Board to have or be seen
to have any ability to redefine the scope of our work, including the scope of
the expert engagement. Its role, if any, is to understand that the price of the
effort is reasonable. To that end, it can review the other proposals we
received to make that determination quickly and in the affirmative. I think the
other questions are inappropriate and I would not even answer them.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a
href="mailto:at-review-bounces@icann.org"><span style='color:black'>at-review-bounces@icann.org</span></a><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><<a
href="mailto:at-review-bounces@icann.org"><span style='color:black'>at-review-bounces@icann.org</span></a>><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>
<b>To</b>:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a
href="mailto:briancute@afilias.info"><span style='color:black'>briancute@afilias.info</span></a><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><<a
href="mailto:briancute@afilias.info"><span style='color:black'>briancute@afilias.info</span></a>>;<span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="mailto:wadelman@godaddy.com"><span
style='color:black'>wadelman@godaddy.com</span></a><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><<a
href="mailto:wadelman@godaddy.com"><span style='color:black'>wadelman@godaddy.com</span></a>><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>
<b>Cc</b>:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a
href="mailto:at-review@icann.org"><span style='color:black'>at-review@icann.org</span></a><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><<a
href="mailto:at-review@icann.org"><span style='color:black'>at-review@icann.org</span></a>><span
class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>
<b>Sent</b>: Sat Jul 17 22:16:54 2010<br>
<b>Subject</b>: Re: [AT-Review] ATRT budget<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>RT,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Attached is a draft response to the Board subcommittee’s
questions. I reviewed recordings of ATRT f2f meetings and ATRT
documentation to address the subcommittee’s questions. I would
appreciate your rapid responses/edits to the document so I can reply to the
subcommittee and make any adjustments to the Berkman proposal, if
necessary. Please respond within 24 hours. While the
subcommittee’s desire to provide proper oversight to the review team
budget is entirely appropriate, the possibility that this exchange could affect
the scope of the ATRT’s already deliberated and agreed upon work program
raises very sensitive issues.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Brian</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in;
border-width:initial;border-color:initial;z-index:auto'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
class=apple-converted-space><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Brian Cute
[mailto:briancute@afilias.info]<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>
<b>Se</b></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>