<p dir="ltr">I believe the CWG normally make such check (also the lawyers does) periodically and I expect that the co-chairs do have some coordinations as well. Perhaps the exercise can be more prudent than it currently is, but again one needs to ensure to make such checks when a specific direction is envisaged/taken by the CCWG and not just based on comments by individuals.</p>
<p dir="ltr">That said, if there are indications that CCWG does not seem to go inline with the CWG requirement, those who are in both groups could flag there here. </p>
<p dir="ltr">As to the specific reference you made relating to IRP, considering that this has gone through second reading (?) Perhaps it's good to make a quick check. I personally don't see any inconsistency yet though.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 21 Jan 2016 11:38, "Matthew Shears" <<a href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi<br>
<br>
I am not sure how this could be done but I think it important to assess on an ongoing basis how the CCWG is responding to the dependencies, the concerns raised by outside counsel in mid December and other points that may have been made with regards to the CCWG's evolving proposal. The reason I raise this is because of a concern on the CCWG lists related to whether or not and how the IRP might be the appropriate mechanism for addressing the requirement from the CWG for an appeals mechanism for IANA related matters. I think it important that we fully gauge the degree to which the work of the CCWG is satisfying CWG requirements, etc., during the various readings and prior to a final CCWG supplemental report being issued.<br>
<br>
Matthew<br>
<br>
On 20/01/2016 22:00, Lise Fuhr wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Paul,<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
We will also discuss the CCWG and our review at the call tomorrow.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Lise<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of James Gannon<br>
Sent: 20 January 2016 20:24<br>
To: Paul M Kane - CWG; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG discussion<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
-jg<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 20/01/2016, 6:14 p.m., "<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a> on behalf of Paul M Kane - CWG" <<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a> on behalf of <a href="mailto:paul.kane-cwg@icb.co.uk" target="_blank">paul.kane-cwg@icb.co.uk</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
At our last call it was decided we would have on-line discussion in<br>
advance of our next call ... this list has been silent.<br>
<br>
We have a call scheduled for tomorrow - what is the plan?<br>
<br>
Best<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
</blockquote>
_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
-- <br>
<br>
Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project<br>
Center for Democracy & Technology | <a href="http://cdt.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">cdt.org</a><br>
E: <a href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org" target="_blank">mshears@cdt.org</a> | T: <a href="tel:%2B44.771.247.2987" value="+447712472987" target="_blank">+44.771.247.2987</a><br>
<br>
CDT's Annual Dinner, Tech Prom, is April 6, 2016. Don't miss out - register at <a href="http://cdt.org/annual-dinner" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">cdt.org/annual-dinner</a>.<br>
<br>
<br>
---<br>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
</blockquote></div>