[CWG-Stewardship] Call for suggestions to design teams

[Greg Shatan]

Avri --

One more thing re the Integrated Model.  While I believe it can be further
discussed and refined in a design team, it is on the agenda for Tuesday's
full CWG meeting.  After that, it can probably be moved off into a design
team for further refinement and then brought back to the full group.

Greg

On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Avri,
>
> The design teams (or task forces) are emphatically not only for process
> issues.  For instance, in my view design teams need to be set up for issues
> such as the following:
>
> 1. Specifying and drafting service level documentation (specifying and
> drafting may be two different design teams, or just two different
> deliverables of one design team).
> 2. Specifying and drafting escalation documentation
> 3. Specifying and drafting reporting requirements documentation
> 4. IPR issues, including the IANA trademark and domain name
> 5. Replacing (or not) the NTIA validation/authorization function, and if
> replacing it, designing/documenting the function, and creating an
> implementation path (this may be 3 design teams)
>
> As such, a design team to explore the Integrated Model would certainly fit.
>
> As a final clarification, design teams are not decision teams; they are
> supposed to bring the draft deliverable(s) back to the full team for
> debate, discussion, revision and approval.
>
> Greg
>
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
>>  Hi,
>>
>> Are design team only for process issues?
>>
>> If not, perhaps a design team, contingent on how Tuesday goes - of
>> course, to further work on the Integrated Model approach.
>>
>> But I am just not sure if this sort of topic fits the intent of the
>> design teams.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> On 22-Feb-15 11:14, Lise Fuhr wrote:
>>
>>  Dear all,
>>
>> This is a call for suggestions to design teams. If you have any issues
>> that you think are relevant for a design team please provide the group with
>> a submission of name, a brief description of topic and scope and finally an
>> indication of who should to be lead of the team.
>>
>> Included are an example of relevant design teams, the “Draft Working
>> methods” and “Draft Design team Guidelines”.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Jonathan and Lise
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing listCWG-Stewardship at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> *Gregory S. Shatan **ï* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab*
>
> *Partner* *| IP | Technology | Media | Internet*
>
> *666 Third Avenue | New York, NY 10017-5621*
>
> *Direct*  212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022
>
> *Fax*  212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428
>
> *gsshatan at lawabel.com <gsshatan at lawabel.com>*
>
> *ICANN-related: gregshatanipc at gmail.com <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>*
>
> *www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>*
>



-- 

*Gregory S. Shatan **ï* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab*

*Partner* *| IP | Technology | Media | Internet*

*666 Third Avenue | New York, NY 10017-5621*

*Direct*  212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022

*Fax*  212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428

*gsshatan at lawabel.com <gsshatan at lawabel.com>*

*ICANN-related: gregshatanipc at gmail.com <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>*

*www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150222/5060f459/attachment-0001.html>