[CWG-Stewardship] Notes, Recordings, Transcript CWG DT-F Meeting 19 May

[Brenda Brewer]

Dear all, 

 

The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG DT-F Meeting on 19 May are available here:
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53775020


Action Items


ACTION Alan: reach out to chairs of organizations to be included with Representative or chairs (
SSAC, RSSAC and IETF) if comfortable the proposed direction of travel, after completion and
discussion next write up 

ACTION Alan: Provide next draft, will include high level overview, and indication of direction of
travel post adoption of proposal and before transition is completed


Notes


DT-F Meeting 19 May 2015, noon UTC

Agenda: Discussion draft proposal circulated by Alan on list

 

Summary to date

Draft Proposal to replace NTIA Administrative Oversight

Currently the NTIA is involved in virtually all changes to the architecture and implementation of
the Root Zone (excluding those solely within individual Root Servers?) and all operational and
procedural changes within IANA and the Root Zone Maintainer.

DT-F has recommended that such oversight is no longer required for day-to-day changes, but that
oversight is still required for substantive changes.

Oversight needed, not so much for transaction, but for operational and procedural changes.

Question: why not the ICANN Board?

Suggestion new Board committee 

Not in document:  what is not , and what is substantive

Chuck: What is substantive difficult to define,  future can not be predicted.

Example major automation push. When items are defined. Example to be included (substantive examples
in text box)

If in doubt go to the committee.

Is Board Committee appropriate term (semantics)?

Rename to Advisory Council?  Come up with title that captures.

Do we need involvement by ASO/RIRs? To be included

Examples of decisions: not a real committee, looking into topic, which involves a lot of people,
over long period of time. Changes done through: board community involvement, and at the end decision
by Board. Always special 

Committee, is not place where decision is made, or technical discussions are made, but
superstructure, under which decision and proposal are made. 

Question: Board taking final decision? Yes

Warn against creating another structure for one of decision

Issues: process to get decision to the Board.

Try to put into document: Committee is conveyor, and rule is other experts need to be involved.

Would be good, to reach out to the chairs, who are supposed to have a seat on the committee, to give
feed-back ( to check if any issues from their end) 

Action Alan: reach out to chairs of organizations to be included with Representative or chairs (
SSAC, RSSAC and IETF) if comfortable the proposed direction of travel, after completion and
discussion next write up 

Question: initiation of process (avoid spurious requests).

Include gating factor to get going. Participants in the group need to be interested.

Question: would this be a standing committee ( only meets when needed).

Need for committee to meet in case major changes through IFR or PTI.?

Committee may never meet, but initiate process/discussion. 

Who is going to name TLD reps?

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150519/744b5398/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/20150519/744b5398/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/20150519/744b5398/smime-0001.p7s>