[CWG-Stewardship] Notes, Recordings, Transcript RFP 3B 27 January 14:00 UTC

Tue Jan 27 21:40:28 UTC 2015

Dear all, 

The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Call on 22 January are available here:
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51417874

Notes:

RFP 3B Call Tuesday 27 January 2015, 14.00-16.00 UTC

1. Welcome

Welcome by the RFP 3B coordinator

2. Roll call

All on ADOBE Connect recorded as present

Eduardo Diaz Audio only

3. Internal to ICANN Option

Introduction by coordinator.

Request to PS to clarify issues. BT (staff support) and coordinator, expanded on another internal
solution

Question: first "Trust" ? 

Response: not much progress on trust proposal given the need for legal advise.

Any question re. PS email

 a. "Trust"

 b." No Trust" Internal arrangement

Presentation BT on internal solution

Caveats: 

*        

*       Generic approach. If it is ICANN internal, most likely, most work is around managing the
IANA work: community role , monitoring it ,and engage with IANA 

*        

*       Approach also trying to capture most of input received, on mechanics.

*        

*       General considerations: model to replace internal mechanisms to take away need for Contract
Co.  

*        

*       Need to create SO type body through ICANN Body. Reasons: no NTIA contract , hence need to
create method to establish formal communication with ICANN with respect to preforming the IANA
Functions. To represent the needs of the IANA Function customers

*        

*       IN this approach CSC and MRT need to be represented as well. To keep it simple: the CSC is
inside the MRT ( sub-group), they are linked anyway and ther is an escalation path. Does this mean
the CSC only made up of persons on the MRT? Reason to include in MRT is administrative simplicity.
Characteristics of CSC could be specified in ICANN Bylaws.

*        

*       MRT members have permanent members. Reason: need to fullfill functions as envisioned. This
iimplies need to define membership and mechnisms. Under this proposal non- SO/AC associated
interests can be included (example ccNSO and role of non-ccNSO members)

How does it relate to Contract Co option? 

*        

*       MRT to prepare IANA statement of Work. every 3-5 years.and send to ICANN Board for approval
( if no agreement, accountability mechanisms kick-in.

*        

*       What would MRT in other years. 

Escalation path for CSC:

Annual ports from CSC and community, could also include recommendations to the Board

In case of serious breach, MRT 

Separation Of IANA ( key component ) if needed/required.

Mechanics need to be worked on.

How to avoid ICANN Board from changing th eBylaws of MRT? Bylaws evolution may need to be needed.
However, 

Chris Disspain: - Pushback on Auda on proposal of golden Bylaw or trust. What is best way forward?
Any push from the button, must

at least be endorsed by the GNSO and ccNSO. In reality the internal SO's need to involved Continuum
analysis: Contract Co one end of the continuum 

at the other end give it to ICANN and can not be removed. 

Moving away from the exterm ICANN internal option. First step is going to "Golden Bylaw" option. 

The next step closer to Contract Co, is the "Trust" model, slightly more clearly defined. A lot of
non-common law jursidiction do not understand the notion of "trust"

Critical to get independent legal advice on 3 models;

*        

*       First question are the options legally viable

*       What are risks involved in each of the options

*       Do the lawyers have other ideas.

AM: Ask Greg Shatan where we are with respect to legal advise

Response on comments: SO and AC approval included in draft. There neds to be formal support for MRT
decision. Document is about how it could work, 

form a practical point of view. There are unknown around Contract Co. 

Alan Greenberg( AG): MRT may initiate, but

AG supporter of "No Trust" , now moving towards "trust" to accommodate those who are in support of
Contract Co.

"Golden Bylaw" is related to shareholders. better use other term.

Question: Does separation need Board approval? Response: th ICANN Board will be involved, however
how it is constraint. 

Note CD: it is entirely possible to craft bylaws that prevent the Board to overturn/
<http://change.it/> change it.  

AM: Legal advice needed on "Bylaw construct" 

AG: The CCWG is charged with accountability. The CCWG is working in the direction of accountability
of Board i.e. can not overrule the community. 

AM: Notes overlap with "trust: question should there be two  "internal options"?

CD: Counter question: why  should  viable options be excluded, until such time legal advise has been
received

Donna Austin: Not sensible to exclude options. Comments received also included to "Internal to
ICANN" solution.

Martin Boyle: agrees with conclusion to provide a range of different options. in solution proposed
by BT: how does the process move into separation of IANA?  Solution has to be put in by
Accountability CCWG or looking at creation Contract Co. at the point the process reached the point
of separation

Response BT: Draft deals with 99% point of time of IANA Function performance. How to deal with
separation i.e the extreme situation, needs legal adivise.  Several option possible 

hence currently not included. 

AM: Include two options in the paper, 

Progress on seeking independent legal advice: Greg Shatan

*        

*       Scoping document has been prepared

*       Call of Client committee.  Includes call with Samantha Eisner to understand options, either
through procument process or use of other firm then Joones Day ( to avoid procurement 
process, and speed up engaging a law-firm).

*        

*       Goal is to have law-firm engaged asap, preferably before Singapore meeting

*        

*       Update on RFP 3b call on Thursday, if more to be send by 

Greg Shatan: scoping document includes reflection on "trust" option, and some of the follow-up
questions ( such as "guardian"

The document can be found at the Google doc link:
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oaPfFokCAqTluwP3D0UD-9RPCHS8JqBVOW2dkuSrUvk/edit?usp=sharing>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oaPfFokCAqTluwP3D0UD-9RPCHS8JqBVOW2dkuSrUvk/edit?usp=sharing

Note scoping document is extensive, it is intended as background paper for the law-firm. Expectation
is that the lawyers will be bale to drill down to the core questions for this group

CWG paper to be drafted will not include any legal advise

Question to BT: Can document be shared?  It is clear it meant for discussion. Document is intended
for discussion, all aspects are open. 

Action staff: Staff to share draft with the CWG

MRT Section document

Primary responsibility: Statement of work

Question: Are there differences in MRT section relative to MRT under Contract Co?

There are specific parts specific to Internal option. 

Question AM: focus on differences

PS: what will the MRT and CSC will look like depends on what sits on the top ( Internal, trust, or
contract co model)

Specific for this option: mechanism around the IANA Function Statement of work ( IFSoW) and
mechanism for escalation around the IFSow 

Managing the option of separation will be different, conditions, method etc.

Chartering SO and AC need to support separation

Explanation why some of the choices are made

CSC

Proposal for members

Final section of paper: Notes and Issues.Includes additional questions and assumptions. 

4. Summation and Next Steps

Prepare a paper to inform the community in Singapore. 

No need to replicate CSC and MRT or IAP. 

Bernie's paper as part of the paper ( as Bylaw model) and include "Trust" model

Should next meeting go ahead: dependent on Bernie turning around paper.

At this stage need for feed-back by members of the RFP 3b group. Next step could also be to take
document level deeper  for example bylaw)

CD: Need for legal advice. Let others assist in getting legal advice

Bernie's document will be made available on Google docs

Google Doc of Bernie's doc:
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/10lR84kmBddiUISQCZFLXe5KLarIFG7GMKVvdPNm9QTc/edit?usp=sharing>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10lR84kmBddiUISQCZFLXe5KLarIFG7GMKVvdPNm9QTc/edit?usp=sharing

PS. to assist on "Trust" section

Deadline to provide comments:on Bernie document: Friday 30 January 2015, 23.00 UTC

5. AOB

6. Next Meeting

Cancelled 29 January.  Next meeting TBD

Action Items

Deadline to provide comments:on Bernie document: Friday 30 January 2015, 23.00 UTC

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150127/0883ad4b/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/20150127/0883ad4b/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/20150127/0883ad4b/smime-0001.p7s>