<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">
<div>
<div>Dear All,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Please find below the notes concerning CSC and MRT from today’s meeting. If you have any comments / edits, please share these with the mailing list by Sunday 11 January at 11.00 UTC at the latest.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best regards,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Marika</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>================</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>CSC - Green areas (areas of convergence)</b></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><i>Remit / function</i></div>
<div>a. There should be a CSC to carry out the tasks as defined the CWG Draft Proposal (question 1a of survey)</div>
<div>b. The role of the CSC should be focused on service level commitments performance indicators and quality assurance (question 13 of survey) </div>
<div>c. Periodic review of initial and future service level agreements (and a bi-lateral mechanic to bind IANA Function to those)</div>
<div>d. Publication of QA and performance indicators, receiving reports from the IANA Functions Operator (possibly redacted if appropriate)</div>
<div>e. Escalation power to MRT</div>
<div>f. Dealing with issues in the aggregate (individual issues to be raised directly by users - see g.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><i>Composition</i></div>
<div>g. Users should have the opportunity to go directly to the IANA functions operator rather than being required to go via an intermediary (question 10, 11 and 12 of survey)</div>
<div>h. The CSC should have a continuous existence (question 8 of survey)</div>
<div>i. The CSC membership should primarily consists of ccTLD and gTLD registry operators with related experts (question 4 of survey)</div>
<div>j. Members should have staggered terms to provide continuity (question 9 of survey)</div>
<div>k. Consider CSC as a sub-set of the MRT (e.g. like executive / non-executive board, could meet periodicially, corralation of activities)</div>
<div>l. Selection process needs to be defined (knowledge and skill component will be key), incl. how many members and how/who makes the selection (see for example SSAC membership application and review process). Terms should be defined. </div>
<div>m. General conflict of interest arrangements (e.g. registry involved in a delegation / redelegation action that is under consideration by CSC must recuse themselves from the discussion)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><i>Lines of reporting</i></div>
<div>n. Principle of subsidiarity (solve issue at the lowest level before escalating)</div>
<div>o. Detail on issues of confidentiality need to be specified</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>MRT - Green areas (areas of convergence)</b></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><i>Lines of reporting</i></div>
<div>a. The MRT should not recreate another ICANN (question 6 of the survey)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><i>Remit</i></div>
<div>b. Adequate care should be taken to restrict the growth dynamics of the MRT (question 7 of the survey)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><i>Composition</i></div>
<div>c. There should be multistakeholder representation on the MRT (question 8 of the survey)</div>
<div>d. Members should have staggered terms to provide continuity (question of 18 of the survey)</div>
<div>e. The term length of MRT members should be limited to two full contract cycles (question 22 of the survey). Refinement of term and term-limits needed. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><i>Function</i></div>
<div>Initial Consideration of MRT’s Functions (from the public consultation document):</div>
<ul>
<li>Issue instructions (to Contract Co. if formed) (see also tie with RFP4)</li><li>Meet annually to review overall IANA Functions Operator performance</li><li>Annual IANA Budget Review</li><li>Address any escalation issues raised by the CSC</li><li>Perform certain elements of administration currently set forth in the IANA Functions Contract and currently being carried out by the NTIA</li><li>(Suggestion from Elise) Address any issue within their mandate as reviewing the IANA function operator</li><li>Annual review of key performance indicators</li><li>Platform for broader engagement with the community</li></ul>
</div>
</body>
</html>