<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1639336390;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-93539536 134807567 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-GB link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Alan,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>“</span>Either way, that is not a Board that I would want to sit, on … <span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>” <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I think this is a key point. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>My understanding of the construct as proposed is that it’s not a board we (community members / representatives) should aspire to sit on whilst the subsidiary remains controlled by ICANN.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>As we have discussed previously, the subsidiary (or associate) provides a number of advantages including being a contracting entity and one which is separable from ICANN.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Therefore, board structure / composition is clearly of significantly more importance in the event of separation, but not whilst the sub / associate is under ICANN control.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>As it stands (assuming an insider board), we have a coherent overall PTI structure which we may want to have input on the board makeup to ensure two (IMO) criteria are met:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>1.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Operational integrity and performance of the PTI e.g. IANA functions manager, ICANN executive responsible for IANA function and (possibly) 1-3 others<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>2.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Statutory obligations (although I cannot see any reason why ICANN wouldn’t ensure this to be the case).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Considering points such as those raised in Avri’s email below, I expect all of the finance and operational issues to be dealt with by a competent operational management team / board.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>In addition to these, it seems to me that the question remains, what (if any) unsolved issues / problems must the PTI board be solving for?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Jonathan<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca] <br><b>Sent:</b> 26 May 2015 03:31<br><b>To:</b> Greg Shatan; Avri Doria<br><b>Cc:</b> cwg-stewardship@icann.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [CWG-Stewardship] PTI Board Composition<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Greg, I have to disagree.<br><br>My impression was that the ICANN Board is trying to lessen the operational aspects of what it does. Why would it want to manage PTI at that level when it is not even doing that now?<br><br>Or are you proposing that ICANN staff act as puppet masters telling the PTI Board what to do?<br><br>Either way, that is not a Board that I would want to sit, on bearing the fiduciary duty for PTI, but none of the authority.<br><br>Alan<br><br>At 25/05/2015 10:12 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:<br><br><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Avri,<br><br>I think that so long as PTI is controlled by ICANN, ICANN and the ICANN Board can and should take much of the responsibility for PTI's functioning and decision-making, rather than the PTI Board. As such, the PTI Board just needs to act as a conduit for decisions made by its "parent," ICANN. If ICANN no longer controls PTI, things will need to change, but I suggest that now is not the time to make that change.<br><br>Greg<br><br>On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Avri Doria <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'>Hi,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'>We have talked about it quite a bit.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>I do not believe the CWG can be completely deterministic on what the PTI<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>will and won't do, the exigencies of the situations it finds itself in<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>will determine that. It will obviously have to deal with the relities<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>of being a company like budget and development plans. It will deal with<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>staffing levels. It may face issues of schedules and funding for major<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>innovation in equipment and software. It will have to deal with issues<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>brought to it through the CSC and other escalation mechanisms. It may<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>have to deal with [inter]national ccTLD issues. PTI may even have to<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>respond to an RFP put out as a result of of an IFR, and I am sure a PTI<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'>Board would be involved.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>This is one reason I suggest the the Nomcom pick 3. To deal with the<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>variability of issues that the PTI may face in a considered informed<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>manner based on the then current realities. To meet the needs in 5 or 10<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'>years and not just just those our interests dictate today.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>We can constrain the scope of the PTI Board only to a certain degree.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>The realities of being a functioning service company providing services<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>to 3 operational communities and a user community in an evolving network<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>will need to be considered as time goes on when considering the right<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'>person for the PTI Board.<span style='color:#888888'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'><span style='color:#888888'>avri<br><br></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>On 25-May-15 14:28, Donna Austin wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> All<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Has it been decided what the PTI Board would do?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> It seems we should decide on this before we get into composition. The RySG comments have a strong preference for the PTI to be the IANA Dept. as we know it, so business as usual without any undue interference and without the possibility of causing uncertainty for current IANA staff. IANA services are currently satisfactory and we don't want to jeopardise that post transition.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> We have developed other mechanisms to provide for regular monitoring and review, with escalation to deal with non-performance or systemic problems. I don't understand why we need an added, unnecessary in my view, layer of bureaucracy to the PTI Board.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Donna<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> -----Original Message-----<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> From: <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org"> mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Sent: Monday, 25 May 2015 5:23 AM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> To: Alan Greenberg; <a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] PTI Board Composition<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Alan,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Assuming a PTI Board of 5 or larger, two registry related Directors would not be in a preferential position in terms of majority. In my opinion, having a couple Directors who understand the functioning of the IFO in meeting TLD registry needs would increase the chances that the Board would " have the requisite skills and knowledge to do that quickly and effectively".<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Chuck<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> -----Original Message-----<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> From: Alan Greenberg [<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca"> mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>]<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2015 11:57 AM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> To: Gomes, Chuck; <a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] PTI Board Composition<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Chuck, the ALAC has not reach consensus as to whether the PTI Board should be MS or not, but we have definitely reach closure on the PTI Board NOT having registries in a preferential position to other stakeholders (if indeed we end up with a MS PTI Board).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> In my personal opinion, the PTI Board will have relatively little to do in a steady-state situation where everything is working well.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> However, if things are NOT going well, it is the PTI Board that would need to be the first line of recourse in fixing it, and it must have the requisite skills and knowledge to do that quickly and effectively.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> Alan<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> At 24/05/2015 10:25 AM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Avri,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> It is not clear to me that the NomCom's mission and makeup is the right<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> fit to appoint PTI Directors, and particularly a majority of them.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> I haven't tested this idea with others yet, but I kind of like the idea<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> of having one each of the ICANN Directors elected by the ccNSO and GNSO<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> serve on the PTI Board. In an ICANN membership structure, the ccNSO or<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> GNSO could remove their appointed directors if they were not<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> accountability.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Chuck<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> -----Original Message-----<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> From: <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> [<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org"> mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Avri Doria<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2015 8:49 AM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> To: <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] PTI Board Composition<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Hi,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> I would like to put a proposal on the table on the composition of the<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> PTI Board.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Specifically<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> On 22-May-15 18:32, Avri Doria wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>>> * On the PTI Board, I believe it should be minimal, so instead of<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>>> having a balanced multstakeholder set of individuals, it should<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> have a majority<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>>> of representatives (s)elected by a multistakeholder modality. e.g 1<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>>> ICANN Staff, 1 PTI Staff, 3 selected by ICANN Nomcom.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Personally, I propose:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> 1 ICANN Staff as selected by ICANN President and endorsed by ICANN<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Board<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> 1 PTI Staff, typically the Sr. Officer of the PTI, i.e its President or<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> Executive Director or their designee<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> 3 Nomcom Selections<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> various liaisons as agreed after cross operational community<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> discussions<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> This PTI Board would have fewer people in it than the PTI staff has,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> but would be large enough for some degree of diversity.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> While in a formal sense, this would seem to be an outside Board, given<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> that the majority is picked by the ICANN community instead of the ICANN<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> staff, it is an insider board when considered from the perspective of<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> ICANN as a multistakeholder run organization.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> It avoids the problem of deciding that one stakeholder type is more<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> appropriate that another, but allows the community on an annual basis<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> to decide which skills and knowledge are most important using a well<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> established ICANN method. The skills and knowledge may vary over time,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> including considerations such as operational experience, financial<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> skill, international legal knowledge, security capability, root zone<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> operator perspective, community policy perspective, DNS protocol or<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> system design expertise. Those selected by the ICANN Nomcom could be<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> community insiders or outside experts, as decided by each Nomcom<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> according to the perceived needs at that time. The set of<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> considerations and needs would be decided on by the ICANN Nomcom in<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> consultation with ICANN Board & Staff, the multistakeholder community<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> and PTI staff, according to Nomcom's normal current and future<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> practices.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> In terms of the current discussions, it allows us to defer certain<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> decisions, such as which skill and knowledge categories are most<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> appropriate until they can address future understandings. It avoid<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> having the CWG micromanage the future of the PTI Board, yet leaves it<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> under the community's control.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> thanks<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> avri<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> ---<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> <a href="http://www.avast.com">http://www.avast.com</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> _______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> <a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> _______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> <a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> _______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> <a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'>><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>---<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'><a href="http://www.avast.com">http://www.avast.com</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'>CWG-Stewardship mailing list<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'><a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt'><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><br>_______________________________________________<br>CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br><a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>