[CWG-Stewardship] Time frame inquiry (corrected)
grace.abuhamad at icann.org
Tue Jun 9 21:55:51 UTC 2015
9 June 2015
Dear Alissa, Patrik, Mohamed, Martin, Milton, and Xiaodong,
In response to your 27 May request the CWG-Stewardship has been developing
its response to the ICG RFP, which includes an implementation plan. We refer
you to Section IV. D. (Pages 40 42) for further detail. For all changes,
including changes that do not require further assessment by the ICG, we
expect that the community will work with ICANN in implementation.
As you noted in your letter, the exact timeframes are difficult to predict,
especially since the CWG-Stewardship recommends the establishment of a new
legal entity the Post-Transition IANA (³PTI²), an affiliate of ICANN. In
creating PTI, the CWG-Stewardship also envisions the development of a new
contract (between ICANN and PTI) for which the group has received a sample
term sheet, but has not developed further.
According to our independent counsel¹s assessment, the CWG-Stewardship
expects that the incorporation of PTI could be done in a short period of
time. The longer lead-time items include:
1. Identifying the ICANN assets that would need to be assigned to PTI
and assigning those assets under an appropriate agreement.
2. Drafting the PTI governance documents (i.e. articles of incorporation
3. Drafting and finalizing the ICANN-PTI Contract.
Our legal counsel estimates that the above items could take 3-4 months
depending on complexity and need for multiple iterations of such documents.
Furthermore, additional uncertainty of timing is created by the fact that
ICANN has not yet assessed the CWG-Stewardship¹s proposal for an
implementation timeline. There will also be other factors to consider, such
as seeking to ensure ICANN¹s tax-exempt status, for which our independent
legal counsel could not estimate.
The CWG-Stewardship RFP response highlights other elements for
implementation such as the Customer Standing Committee and the IANA Function
Review. These elements are expected to be incorporated into the ICANN Bylaws
as part of the CCWG-Accountability¹s work. The timeline for implementation
of new ICANN Bylaws has not yet been confirmed, but is actively being
considered by the CCWG-Accountability as they develop their implementation
We have focused our response to you on the PTI, the essential, and possibly
longest, implementation portion of the CWG-Stewardship proposal. We refer
you to Section IV. D. (Pages 40 42) for further detail on the
The CWG-Stewardship will send the final proposal to the chartering
organizations by 11th of June in time for them to deal with it at the ICANN
53 meeting in Buenos Aires in Argentina.
If you have any questions regarding any aspects of the proposal, its
development, and its implementation we are at your disposal.
Lise Fuhr & Jonathan Robinson
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in>
Date: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 at 12:25 PM
To: "'cwg-stewardship at icann.org'" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Cc: Mohamed El Bashir <mbashir at mbash.net>, Patrik Fältström
<paf at frobbit.se>
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Time frame inquiry (corrected)
My apologies, the first version of this email that was sent was missing one
question. Please find the corrected version below.
The ICG chairs recently received a letter from Larry Strickling
that included the following text:
"I ask that the community provide us with an update on the status of the
transition planning and the associated timeframes, including the community¹s
views as to how long it will take to finalize the transition plan and
implement it after it is approved. We request that you and the three primary
customer working groups provide us with your views before the end of June,
which will give you the opportunity to discuss these issues with the
multistakeholder community at the June ICANN meeting in Argentina. In
providing this feedback, please keep in mind that the United States
Government will need sufficient time to evaluate the proposal and that all
work items identified either by the ICG and the CCWG-Accountability as
prerequisites for the transition will need to be implemented prior to the
ending of the contract.²
The ICG is therefore gathering input about how much time the operational
communities believe they will need to complete proposal development and
implement the aspects of the transition proposal that the communities have
identified as needing to be completed prior to the expiry of the NTIA
contract (e.g., creation of new contracts, agreements, or entities). From
start to finish, approximately how many weeks or months do you think your
community will need to complete proposal development? From start to finish,
approximately how many weeks or months do you think your community will need
to complete implementation of these aspects? We asked about this in our RFP
but would appreciate a current estimate. We understand that these time
frames may be difficult to predict; we would appreciate your best estimates
and an explanation of factors contributing to those estimates.
If you could provide us an initial response via our liaisons to the CWG
(Martin Boyle, Milton Mueller, and Xiaodong Lee) by June 9 at 23:59 UTC,
that would be much appreciated. If you have further thoughts to communicate
to us later in June, that would be welcome.
Alissa, Patrik, and Mohamed
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 5108 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the CWG-Stewardship