[client com] Revised List of Open Items (or "Punch List")

Wed May 6 21:02:56 UTC 2015

Sharon,

Thank-you. 

Lise is travelling and we have been in touch. I am aware that Greg is at INTA and I haven’t conferred with Martin

Thoughts in-line below.

Jonathan

From: Client Committee List for CWG [mailto:cwg-client at icann.org] 
Sent: 05 May 2015 21:51
To: cwg-client at icann.org
Subject: Re: [client com] Revised List of Open Items (or "Punch List")

Hi all,

We had a few follow-up items from our call today that we would appreciate your input on:

1.  As noted in the chat, let us know if you think it would be helpful to have Sidley on some of the design team calls to help answer any of the legal or structural questions real time.  

OK. We will bear that in mind and let’s highlight with the CWG again tomorrow

2.  Does CWG need our help in drafting the update to Section III of the proposal or will staff be doing that?  We can certainly provide the rationale (Jonathan’s 3 bullets with Chuck’s addition).  The background of how CWG arrived at its proposal would probably be better written by staff or CWG members who have been involved throughout the process, although we are happy to help.

Staff will lead. Your (May 3rd) memo is very helpful as is any contribution you make on review and development of the final proposal.

3.  In working through the PTI Board open items, would you like us to circulate a list of potential “stress tests” or scenario planning for the PTI Board for the CWG to consider as it looks at the issue of an insider vs. an outsider PTI board?  This might help frame the further discussion.

Finally, a couple of logistical points:

1.  We are revising the “punch list” and will recirculate.  We have been circulating memos and other documents to the Client Committee.  Can you confirm this is the right list?

This list is the correct list but where there are documents of information / substance (e.g. updated memo) there is no harm in copying them to the CWG list at the same time.

2.  Is there a CWG call on Thursday that you would like us to join other than the regular weekly client committee call at 14:00 UTC?

I know it is very early but we plan to review some key items on the punch list so I suspect it will be helpful to have one of you at least (You?) on the call. 11h00 UTC / 04h00 PST.

Thanks,

Sharon

SHARON FLANAGAN
Partner

Sidley Austin LLP
+1.415.772.1271
sflanagan at sidley.com

From: cwg-client-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-client-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Client Committee List for CWG
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 9:57 AM
To: cwg-client at icann.org
Subject: Re: [client com] Revised List of Open Items (or "Punch List")

Thank-you Sharon,

That’s very helpful and timely.

Jonathan

From: Client Committee List for CWG [mailto:cwg-client at icann.org] 
Sent: 05 May 2015 16:42
To: 'cwg-client at icann.org'
Subject: Re: [client com] Revised List of Open Items (or "Punch List")

Hi Jonathan,

In terms of the ordering of the items on the list, we had been asked to compile the list in the order the items appeared in the draft proposal. We took that as a general approach, although we did group some items so it is not literally ordered page by page of the proposal. We're happy to re-order or discuss in any order that makes most sense to the group.

In terms of priority items, we flagged those items where we felt the most discussion and work still needed to be done (rather than details relating to more developed concepts). 

For example, matters concerning the PTI Board seem to have elicited a fair amount of emails and discussion. If the board is a board of ICANN employees it will be easy to implement. If, however, an outside board is required, that would involve a great deal of further work and discussion as that creates a new level of accountability and issues similar to what CCWG has been discussing.

In regards to the separation mechanism, there is not a lot of detail on that aspect of the proposal, and to the extent it involves completely new mechanisms (e.g., something beyond the IFR as a trigger), then that will require additional work and discussion.

We hope that's helpful. Let us know if you have further questions and we look forward to speaking with you all shortly.

Best regards,
Sharon

Sharon R. Flanagan 
Sidley Austin LLP 
SF tel: 415-772-1271 
PA tel: 650-565-7008 
Email: sflanagan at sidley.com 

From: Client Committee List for CWG [mailto:cwg-client at icann.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 08:01 AM
To: cwg-client at icann.org <cwg-client at icann.org> 
Subject: Re: [client com] Revised List of Open Items (or "Punch List") 

Dear Sharon & Colleagues,

On further review a couple of minor questions emerged:

1.       Is there any reason for the sequence / order of the document? Comments are favourable on it being comprehensive but I have a preference for working through these points in a different order to how they are presented.

2.       1, 4-5 & 27-32 are presented as your view of priority items as we asked you to do. Related to 1 above, it would be helpful to have a brief rationale as to why these are the priority items? E.g. because answering these is a necessary condition for dealing with the others (which is not obviously the case to me).

Thank-you in advance.

Jonathan

From: Client Committee List for CWG [mailto:cwg-client at icann.org] 
Sent: 01 May 2015 23:32
To: Client Committee
Subject: [client com] Revised List of Open Items (or "Punch List")

Dear All,

Attached is a revised list of open items (or “punch list”) for the CWG.  This highlights the priority items from a timing standpoint and also identifies the relevant design team.

Best regards,

Sharon

****************************************************************************************************

This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential.

If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us

immediately.

****************************************************************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-client/attachments/20150506/e790b877/attachment-0001.html>