<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">CWG IANA meeting #39 on 14 April at 10:00 UTC</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><b>Notes</b>: </div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Seun Ojedeji on audio only at this time.</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><b>Opening Remarks</b></div><ul><li>Purpose of call: discuss structural considerations. </li><li>The 'Punch list' will guide the conversation</li><li>There are issues with the order of questions in the 'Punch List' but it represents a good aide memoire</li><li>In Istanbul, the group set aside 5 models and decided to focus on 2 variations of an internal model</li><li>Emergence of a 'reverse hybrid model' on the list in the last few hours. For the present, we should not get involved in a detailed conversation on the 'reverse hybrid'</li><li>Try to converge our thinking as opposed to create new discussions. </li></ul><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Chairs have change the order of the questions on the 'Punch List'</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><b>Question 9 </b>deals with 'which variant' --> sounds like the group is leaning torward legal entity</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">With legal entity, if there were ever bankruptcy at ICANN, it would not necessarily affect PTI</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">The entity can be sued (each party can be)</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Poll for the group (to get sense of the room):</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Which variant is preffered?</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">- legal separation (56.5%)</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">- functional separation (21.7%)</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">- undecided (21.7%)</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div><font color="#007f00">---> direction for Question 9: legal separation variant preference </font></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><b>Question 6:</b> Accountability on ICANN/PTI Contract </div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Periodic Review could trigger separation</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">- address accountability in contract? yes, relevant (but details need to be worked out)</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">- address through PRF and/or CSC? the PRF can review the contract/SOW, but does not hold contract. The CSC is also a review/performance management structure. </div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">- Are other means required? The CCWG will enhance ICANN's accountability mechanisms and these will be important to structure.</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><b>Question 1:</b> What role for PTI Board?</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Insider board agreed on, subject to other new structures withstanding stress tests. And comprehensive contract.</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div><font color="#0000ff"><b>Edit</b> (staff/DT-N): change the term 'Periodic Review Team' to something like 'IANA Review Team'.</font></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div></div></body></html>