[CWG-Stewardship] IOTF Call #6 - Meeting Notes (20 April 2016 @ 19:00 UTC)
Yuko Green
yuko.green at icann.org
Thu Apr 21 21:35:30 UTC 2016
Dear members of the CWG Stewardship,
Below, please find the meeting notes from the IOTF Call #6. The presentation
material, transcript, and audio recordings are now posted at
https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation under "Meetings & Work
Sessions" section. Unfortunately due to technical issue, the AdobeConnect
room recording was not completed though the recording was started at the
beginning of the call. We are working with IT to identify the issue to avoid
this from happening on the future calls. My apology for this inconvenience.
***Meeting Notes***
Implementation Oversight Task Force (ITOF) call #6
20 April 2016 @ 19:00 UTC
Please note that this meeting is being recorded.
To mute or Unmute, select *6 (Star-Six)
If you would like to review the last call(s), the recordings and
presentation materials are posted publicly here:
https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation
Agenda:
1. Opening Remarks
2. Implementation Items
PTI Formation Document Review process
IANA Escalation Mechanisms
3. AOB
Paul Kane's question
RZMA question
4. Closing Remarks
Notes:
PTI Formation documents are:
- Bylaws
- Articles of Incorporation
- Conflict of Interest Policy
Action Items:
- Share Document Review Process & Timeline slide with Client Committee to
discuss their involvement and Sidley's. (ICANN)
- Share PTI formation documents term sheets with Client Committee (and
potentially with Sidley). (ICANN)
- IANA CS Complaint Resolution Process - is the CEO step no longer part of
the process? Chuck will look into the question raised and get back to this
group via the email list. (Chuck Gomes)
- IANA Problem Resolution Process - Annex J - Flowchart 1 and 3 have the
same title but one swimlane different. Chuck will look into it and get back
to this group via the email list. (Chuck Gomes)
- Section 7 & 8 of annex C: could be included in the ICANN Bylaws, PTI
bylaws or in the ICANN-PTI contract. ICANN to flag this item with lawyers to
make sure it gets included. (ICANN)
- Share the rough timeline of implementation item documents during the next
call (ICANN)
- Review the ICANN Bylaws for the mentioning of the ICANN-PTI contract
(ICANN)
***Chat History***
James Gannon: Will we have audio in the AC room for the call?
James Gannon: Yup can hear
Lise Fuhr: Good evening
Chuck Gomes: I am 3200.
Allan MacGillivray: Tht's me at 5335
Paul Kane: To be clear there will there be PTI Bylaws as it is a seperate
affilaite company
Paul Kane: ?
Alissa Cooper: What section of the bylaws will the PTI Purpose be drawn
from?
Jonathan Robinson: Apologeis for late arrival
Jonathan Robinson: Had a minor IT glitch
Nathalie Vergnolle: Yes, there will be separate PTI bylaws
Paul Kane: Thanks Nathalie
Yuko Green: @Alissa, that would be are covered in Section 16.2 and Annex D
(Articles 1 &2).
Lise Fuhr: Thank you Trang
Yuko Green: @Alissa, the language was circulated via IOTF mail on 15 April
Alissa Cooper: ok, thanks, will find it
matthew shears: + 1 Paul on PTI bylaws
Paul Kane: Agree Trang
Paul Kane: This group is here to help you get it right then it needs
ratification by the groups CWG/SO etc
matthew shears: agree bylaws and AoI should go to Sidley
matthew shears: + 1 Chuck
Paul Kane: Chuck agree
Greg Shatan: With my clilent committee hat on, I'm happy to step in to the
review at that point, suggeted by Chuck.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): agree totally Jonathan
Jonathan Robinson: Reminder of the role of client committee. Not a committee
to take decisions but to facilitate effective interaction with the lawyers
to ensure that we use them efficiently / cost-effectively.
Lise Fuhr: @Jonathan agree
Avri Doria: wasn't this the CSC group.
matthew shears: seems unusual that it would go to GDD
James Gannon: Agree Matt
Donna Austin, Neustar: @Avri, wasn't what the CSC group?
matthew shears: PTYI BOard is not on the escalation path in the slide
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): hmmm
matthew shears: PTI Board would come after the IANA functions manager as the
IANA functions manager is on the PTI Board if I recall correctly
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): that resonates Matthrw
Donna Austin, Neustar: This is for individual complaints
Jonathan Robinson: What does the reference CWG 1367 mean?
Paul Kane: How long wil this take? If there is a problem there needs to be
a quick fix .....
Avri Doria: i guess i am missing the problem here. this seems to accurately
reflect stage 1.
Avri Doria: i do not think it was an omission
James Gannon: Its actually para 367 in our proosal Johnathan
James Gannon: *proposal
Avri Doria: 1367
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): the proposed
Yuko Green: 1367 refers to the paragraph number from ICG proposal
Jonathan Robinson: Thanks Yuko. I was looking for the reference in the
original CWG proposal
matthew shears: If this is for individuals the proposed escalation path on
the screen makes sense
matthew shears: (not the current one)
Paul Kane: Today there is GDD - but tomorrow there will be PTI Board
Yuko Green: @jonathan, that would be paragraph 367 from CWG proposal
Jonathan Robinson: Thank-you Yukp
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): yes Avri thus the *proposed*
Alan Greenberg: I have no problem with the ICANN CEO being removed. Was just
curious that it was there today.
Paul Kane: Agree Avri .... no longer there
Donna Austin, Neustar: @Alan - I think it is at the complainant's discretion
to take their complaint to the ICANN President & CEO, something anyone can
do, not just as it relates to IANA
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): THX Chuck
matthew shears: + 1 Avri and + 1 Paul on speed and efficiency
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): agree Donna
Paul Kane: Donna - redelegation will (likely) be settled in Court - but
technical operations need to involve The Managemnt of PTI- ie the Board
Avri Doria: agree with Donna and that is a reasonable option
James Gannon: Yes for emercengy technical issues there is the 24x7
escalation process
Avri Doria: i think the right hand table corresponds to what we included in
the plan.
James Gannon: +1 Avri
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): YUP
Donna Austin, Neustar: I think the short answer to Trang's quesiton is there
was no oversight.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): I will say again *the proposal*
Allan MacGillivray: +1 Jonathan on agreeing to the current CWG proposal
(right hand chart) and moving on. The IANA Functions Manager can always
discuss this with the CEO. So, let's move on.
Avri Doria: while the PRI may be a service provider to GDD, i did not think
the IFPM would be a report of the GDD president except in so far as the GDD
prez is on PTI board.
Avri Doria: ... PTI ...
Avri Doria: they wanted to be sure there was no oversight. good due
dillgence.
Donna Austin, Neustar: @Alan, it was an example
Donna Austin, Neustar: a bad one, but just an example.
Paul Kane: ccTLD are not ICANN - they are local and IANA confirm local and
report to ICANN
Alan Greenberg: @Donna, yes, but one that I tdon't think is possible, so was
curious if I was missing something.
Alan Greenberg: @Paul, yes, but ultimately IANA only takes action after
action of the ICANN Board - today.
Alan Greenberg: ICANN Boardpresumably verifying that local issues meet RFC
Donna Austin, Neustar: @Alan, I was looking for examples at short notice and
used a bad one.
Paul Kane: ICANN verify that the ransfer is correct (ie Registrants have
been safely transferred) - ie stability of the ccTLD users
Paul Kane: Secure and stability of the DNS .....
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Alan reefer back nee to the FOI for
Delegations lokking to both RFC 1591 and the GAC Priciples relsting to
Delegations
Alan Greenberg: @Donna :-)
Paul Kane: Bylaws... makes most sense... Thanks
James Gannon: Para 264 for refernce
Paul Kane: Thanks Trang
Donna Austin, Neustar: I have to drop from the call. thanks all
Alissa Cooper: I have a different question to ask under AOB, if we have time
Lise Fuhr: I have to leave at the top of the hour
Paul Kane: Note taker - It is ICANN Bylaws and also PTI bylaws
matthew shears: + 1 Alissa - both sets of bylaws are key
Yuko Green: @Paul, thank you
Paul Kane: THanks .... Yuko ( remove Either)
Paul Kane: Thasnk
Yuko Green: Thank you Paul
James Gannon: I dont think that the CCWG would provide much control over
ICANNs ability to create and modify contracts
Alissa Cooper: it is currently referenced in 1.1(d), but not for the effect
that Chuck was describing
James Gannon: Unless the wording was places directly into the bylaws and not
just a reference
James Gannon: +1 Paul
James Gannon: Yes that it being done in other areas
Paul Kane: Thanks all
James Gannon: thanks all
Jonathan Robinson: Thank-you Trang
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Thnks everyone...Bye
Greg Shatan: Bye all!
Yuko Green
Strategic Programs Manager
Global Domains Division
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Direct Line: +1 310 578 8693
Mobile: +1 310 745 1517
E-mail: <mailto:yuko.green at icann.org> yuko.green at icann.org
<http://www.icann.org/> www.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160421/c00fc929/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5096 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160421/c00fc929/smime-0001.p7s>
More information about the CWG-Stewardship
mailing list