[CWG-Stewardship] Notes, Recordings, Transcript CWG IANA Meeting #43 30 April

Thu Apr 30 13:29:14 UTC 2015

Dear all, 

The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Meeting #43 on 30 April  are available here:
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52897473

Action Items

Action item: Submit comment to public comment forum by deadline.

Action item: CWG members encouraged to share further comments and input on this issue. 

Action item: CWG encouraged to review punch list and start thinking about items on the punch list
and how to deal with those.

Action item: CWG Chairs to discuss dependencies further with CCWG Chairs in meeting later today.

Action item: Chairs to reach out to ICANN Finance team on current state of work, including Sidley
work on PTI and request whether there are any initial considerations with regard to possible budget
implications as well as FY16 budget. 

Action item: Avri to identify open items with regards to separation mechanism

Notes

Roll call based on AC attendance. No one on audio only.

1. Opening Remarks

*        Number of outstanding items have been identified in the punch list - further work of the
client committee expected

*        Any concerns or issues that have arisen as a result of the public comment period? None at
this stage. 3 Comments have been submitted to date (see
<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-22apr15/>
http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-22apr15/)

2. Outreach Efforts

*        See overview of outreach efforts shared during the call

*        Slide deck that has been used for webinars can also be used by members / participants in
their respective outreach efforts (see
<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52897455>
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52897455) 

*        Two additional webinars have been scheduled on 6 and 7 May to allow for additional
questions. If additional time is available, chairs could consider answering questions that have been
raised to date in the public comment forum.

*        Call earlier today with CRISP Team - planning to have other calls with CRISP Team and
outreach to IANAPLAN to enhance understanding of respective proposals and discuss possible
implications for the different communities.

*        Continued co-ordination with CCWG Chairs - Chairs co-ordination call scheduled for later
today

*        Role of ICG to co-ordinate, but CWG-Chairs can assist by ensuring clarification where
needed and dialogue with other proposers. 

*        Members' outreach summary: two webinars organized for ccTLD community (organizers: Paul
Kane and Staffan Jonson) - some concern expressed on how proposal can be considered in current
timeframe. ALAC organized a webinar for the At-Large community. GAC will have two conferences on CWG
proposal on 5th May. ICANN's GSE team organised with NCSG a civil society webinar on the
CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability. RySG has discussed it during its meeting last week and is
planning a webinar next week which will also be offered to the RrSG. 

3. Status of Proposal and Open Issues

    a. Submission to FY16 Budget & Operating Plan Public Comment Period

Deadline for comments is approaching. Proposed input has been shared with the CWG (taking work of DT
that is included in the draft proposal and submit that to the public comment forum). No objections
received to submitting the comment as proposed.

Action item: Submit comment to public comment forum by deadline.

    b. DT-A on SLEs

DT has requested release of work/process flow charts to inform further conversations. Approval needs
to be provided by NTIA for this release. Following that, further work will be undertaken on this
issue. Concerns expressed by others concerning the time it is taking to provide the relevant
information to move this work forward. Is there any link between confidential reports that are
currently provided by IANA to NTIA and SLEs? If so, how are these expected to be dealt with. DT A is
currently only aware of day-to-day transactions, not any other activities. Work flow charts may
provide further insights into where other SLEs may be required. Confidential reports contain
registry information that may be sensitive and as such are kept confidential - something that may
need further consideration. 

    c. DT-F on Root Zone Environment Relationships

There are a number of loose ends that will need to be addressed, in particular the overlap with DT C
with regards to changes to the root zone architecture. Need direction on who/how to handle this. 

Action item: Alan to list remaining issues so that the CWG can decide how to best tackle those.

    d. PTI Board

Some discussion has already commenced on the list - form should follow function. CWG should decide
what the role of the PTI Board is before deciding who is on it. Board derives from the fact that PTI
would be a separate legal entity - as a result, minimal legal function. See also Sidley memo. If CWG
would go further than minimal legal function, CWG would need to take into account any accountability
aspects that may need to be addressed. CWG could consider minimum Board but leave option open to
expand should additional functions be identified at a later stage. Other communities may also have
input on this topic. For example, if other communities would decide to contract directly with PTI,
this could result in additional responsibilities? To maximize separability, all assets should sit
with PTI (incl. PTI being party to the contracts). Checks and balances would come from ICANN - hence
the importance of CCWG-Accountability work. Selection of PTI Board members is important issue based
on input received to date. Not decided yet how board members would be selected. CWG is conscious
that this is an area of sensitivity, but as a wholly owned subsidiary / affiliate it may be less of
a concern? Also, CWG has indicated preference for 'lightweight' solution so that should also be
factored in. Additional input on this topic may also be received in response to public comment. 

Action item: CWG members encouraged to share further comments and input on this issue. 

    e. Section IV (Cheryl update)

Cannot apply stress test scenarios of CCWG (currently on version 10.3) until mechanisms and
structures have been designed / agreed upon. A subset of those stress tests are related to the IANA
Stewardship Transition. Avri and Cheryl reviewed stress tests and contingencies that are in Section
IV which seem to cover all that is needed from the perspective of the stress tests that have been
developed by the CCWG. Further input may be received in response to the public comment forum.

    f. Other issues?

4. Client Committee Update & Issues

Call scheduled today at 14.00 UTC.

a. Memo on PTI Board & Costs

Circulated to CWG list 

b. Punch list

New punch list of open items has been circulated. Will be discussed on client committee call today
and possible further refined, following which it will be circulated to CWG list.

c. CCWG Dependencies

Client committee keeps on monitoring CCWG dependencies. Sidley also provides support to the CCWG. 

d. Other

No major outstanding items.

Action item: CWG encouraged to review punch list and start thinking about items on the punch list
and how to deal with those.

5. CCWG-Accountability Dependencies 

Ongoing engagement with CCWG will be required as work progresses. IANA Function Review bylaw (AoC
type review) - AoC reviews are not expected to be dealt with as 'fundamental' bylaws from the CCWG
perspective. IANA Function Review could be dealt with separately as a fundamental bylaw if needed /
desirable. Separation process function - does that need a separate bylaw or would that get included
in the IANA Function Review? If it is separate, would the CCWG present it, or would the CWG do so?

Action item: CWG Chairs to discuss dependencies further with CCWG Chairs in meeting later today.

6. AOB

*        Frequency of meetings - can we go back to 1 meeting per week? Consider using 2nd meeting
time to dig into specific topics that need resolution. Easier to cancel meetings than to reschedule.
Maybe leave on the schedule, but decide day prior to the meeting whether or not to go ahead with the
meeting. Agreed to keep placeholder for meetings - chairs to decide at least 24 hours ahead of
meeting whether meeting should be cancelled. 

*        Send note to ICANN Finance Team on current state of work, including Sidley work on PTI and
request whether there are any initial considerations with regard to possible budget implications as
well as FY16 budget. This would be separate from the public comment submission.

Action item: Chairs to reach out to ICANN Finance team on current state of work, including Sidley
work on PTI and request whether there are any initial considerations with regard to possible budget
implications as well as FY16 budget. 

*        How should work continue on open items such as Annex L / Separation Mechanism? Chairs to
further consider, but DT leads or individuals should feel encouraged to list open items so that
these can be cross-checked with the punch list.

Action item: Avri to identify open items with regards to separation mechanism

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150430/59ac4a5e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150430/59ac4a5e/image001-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150430/59ac4a5e/smime-0001.p7s>