[CWG-Stewardship] CWG discussion

[Lise Fuhr]

Hi Paul,

I just sent our review to the CCWG proposal to the CCWG group. There has been a three responses to the budget issues but none yet to the separation power. The three responses were not in contradiction to each other so we passed them on to the CCWG. Regarding the separation power - this will be having a second reading within the CCWG tomorrow and we will have a possibility to review this afterwards. 

We will also discuss the CCWG and our review at the call tomorrow.

Best,
Lise
-----Original Message-----
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James Gannon
Sent: 20 January 2016 20:24
To: Paul M Kane - CWG; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG discussion

For context some of this may be due to the incredible workload the CCWG is under at the moment and with the large amount of overlap people may have concentrated on that workload.

-jg




On 20/01/2016, 6:14 p.m., "cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org on behalf of Paul M Kane - CWG" <cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org on behalf of paul.kane-cwg at icb.co.uk> wrote:

>At our last call it was decided we would have on-line discussion in 
>advance of our next call ... this list has been silent.
>
>We have a call scheduled for tomorrow - what is the plan?
>
>Best
>
>Paul
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>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