<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Dear lawyers</div><div>Pls kindly provide clear and unambiguous reply to my e- mails</div><div>1. Source of red, green and blue as I did not find that in your mapping doc.</div><div>2. Clear answers to maintaining the scope of Carve out to those contained in Beckie message at the meeting when this concept was brought to CCWG</div><div>REGARDS</div><div>KAVOUSS <br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On 12 Apr 2016, at 07:47, Seun Ojedeji <<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><p dir="ltr">Dear Co-Chairs,</p>
<p dir="ltr">Will be good to hear response to my questions (bearing in mind the update provided by Grace).</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards<br>
PS: Anyone who has a clear understanding may help as well.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 11 Apr 2016 19:55, "Seun Ojedeji" <<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos<br>
On 11 Apr 2016 6:39 p.m., "Brenda Brewer" <<a href="mailto:brenda.brewer@icann.org" target="_blank">brenda.brewer@icann.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> · Question 9: change to reflect confirmation of the question: CSC liaison is intended to come from RrSG or NCSG. Only restriction is <br>
> that this not be from a gTLD registry. <br>
><br>
SO: That there is still a "or" between NCSG and RrSG makes me wonder what this mean in practice; that NCSG will not appoint if RrSG appointed a liaison first or the other way round?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Secondly, what's the use of a liaison since the DUO are components of the GNSO. I have not gone to the proposal to check if this is inline but it seem like an overkill to me.</p>
<p dir="ltr">> · Question 10: no change. <br>
><br>
> · Question 11: the "it may be appropriate" section can be placed in the Charter. It is not for inclusion in Bylaws. <br>
><br>
> · Question 12: no change. <br>
><br>
> · Question 13: We can keep the clarification and refer to the original text as inclusive of the broader community of 'consumers'. <br>
><br>
SO: sounds more broadly inclusive and clear than the alternative.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Or an <br>
> alternative: direct customers of the naming services" (text used for CSC). That text is as follows: "Any necessary additions to the <br>
> IANA SOW to account for the needs of the consumers of the IANA naming functions [and/or] the ICANN community at large". <br>
><br>
> Question 22: no support for defining a simple majority. There is support for use of consensus. The CWG-Stewardship <br>
> proposal states that the SCWG would follow the stndards established by the CCWG-Principles. <br>
></p>
<p dir="ltr">SO: Is this referring to the current CCWG framework open for PC or principles that will be set in the charter of each CCWG? If the former then fine(although I would note that having such mindset early would have been a good thing), however if it's the later I guess the high-level principles of the SCWG is indeed what we are discussing and I don't think it's something to be determined later.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards</p>
<p dir="ltr">> · Question 24: no change<br>
><br>
> · Other comments: Sharon has one question regaring 18.4a. Will reach out to Avri and Matt to clarify. <br>
><br>
> · Paul Kane noted concerns with consistency in Bylaws language and focus on gTLDs. <br>
><br>
> Action (Sharon): Reach out to Avri and Matt with Client Committee in copy about language in 18.4a. <br>
><br>
> 2. AOB<br>
><br>
> Next meeting (Thursday 14 April at 16:00 UTC). Group may not need a meeting on Thursday. The implementation update and other items <br>
> may be able to be provided via email. <br>
><br>
> Action (Chairs): Due to time constraints on this call, Chairs will discuss and revert back to group with next steps. <br>
><br>
> <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" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
><br>
</p>
</blockquote></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>CWG-Stewardship mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>