[CWG-Stewardship] update on DT X Separation Process

[Donna Austin]

Hi Avri

I understand this is a work in progress and apologies if my questions are still being worked through.

In all possible separation review outcomes, would ICANN would still be the 'contractor' for the IANA service? If not, who would be?

What is meant by "initiate partial separations, i.e. initiate negotiations with new operational partners". I'm not sure I understand what a partial separation is, and who would initiate negotiations? Is this perhaps a subset of "create an RFP" or vice versa?

I'm also not clear what is meant by "initiate full separation of the IANA affiliate" . Is this separation of the IANA affiliate from ICANN to continue to perform the IANA function, or is it separation of the IANA affiliate from ICANN in favour of another provider to be selected through an RFP?

If it is the former, who would the IANA affiliate be accountable to, ie who would replace ICANN as the contractor?

If it is the latter, what would happen to the IANA affiliate? Would it be dissolved in some way?

Thanks

Donna

-----Original Message-----
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Monday, 11 May 2015 3:19 PM
To: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] update on DT X Separation Process

Hi,

I did an update on the file.
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WvBqtgXJ7rNrbN-5Tjf5-gi80aZ2oRYDtF_JLrETRqg/edit?usp=sharing>
and attached a pdf version to this note.

  * Received some comments which I tried to include
  * Responded to Sibley comments, I think
  * Largely separated the process from who does it
  * left bracketed text on the sticky decisions, which include:
      o who dies it:
          + [A cross community of the SOAC would be formed, The IFR
            would be designated]
      o how it is initiated: 
          + on the recommendation of the IANA Review Function as
            approved by [Board, SOAC, members council], or in the case
            of Board rejection via escalation procedure.
          + on supermajority recommendation of both GNSO & ccNSO
          + on recommendation of 1 SO and 2 ACs
      o method of operation
          + The Separation Review would be either a(decision to be made
            by CWG)
              #

                A process initiated in the IFR

              #

                Function as a Cross Community Working Group and would
                follow established guidelines for multistakeholder cross
                community working groups. In this case the participants
                would be either (decision to be made by CWG):

             1.

                Each of the AC/SO would appoint 5 people to the
                Separation Review.

             2. Alternatively: Use the ICG community inclusion and
                proportions to include the broader community as this
                will affect the entire community.


Unfortunately I have another commitment during tomorrow's meeting so will miss the middle hour,  but I do think this is something that the group needs to figure out at some point in the near future.

avri

      o



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com