[CWG-Stewardship] Clarification on PTI scope

[Alan Greenberg]

Correct. The budget document is dated 5 March and a lot has changed 
since then. There is no doubt that all three functions will be 
performed under the auspices of PTI.

Alan

At 23/04/2016 04:07 PM, James Gannon wrote:

>I think this is a leftover item from the initial ICANN staff 
>drafting of PTI, which clarification that the IOTF made to the 
>implementing ICANN staff on our first call and have resolved that as 
>per the CWG proposal PTI will be managing all 3 functions.
>
>-JG
>
>From: 
><<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> 
>on behalf of Christopher Wilkinson 
><<mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
>Date: Saturday 23 April 2016 at 20:46
>To: Seun Ojedeji <<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
>Cc: "<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>cwg-stewardship at icann.org" 
><<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
>Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Clarification on PTI scope
>
>Good catch, Seun.
>
>There is no doubt in my mind that PTI was defined as the successor 
>to all the IANA functions.
>
>Regards
>
>CW
>
>
>
>
>On 23 Apr 2016, at 21:27, Seun Ojedeji 
><<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Dear all,
>>
>> From my understanding of PTI was that it's going to be the new 
>> IANA that will serve the 3OCs (even though numbers and protocols 
>> contracts with ICANN).
>>
>>If my high-level understanding above is right, then i think there 
>>may be something wrong in the fy17 draft budget which has just been 
>>brought to my attention.
>>
>><https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-fy17-05mar16-en.pdf>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-fy17-05mar16-en.pdf
>>
>>Page 25 item 4 says the following:
>>
>>PTI- New legal entity, destined to host activities and costs of the 
>>IANA functions in service of
>>the *Names community*
>>
>>Then page 27 seem to imply that PTI will indeed serve the names 
>>alone. At the moment, I have not considered the application of this 
>>new arrangement and unless I am missing something, I don't think 
>>this was what was proposed.
>>
>>Regards
>>Sent from my LG G4
>>Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>>_______________________________________________
>>CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>><mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>
>_______________________________________________
>CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160423/e163414b/attachment.html>