<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Agree - thanks both.<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 05/09/2016 21:06, Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+aOHUQLGU0994d0M8_FYjPMuwVfmiuaePMNQ0w+uy3MLzepMQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Jonathan,</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Thanks. I think it is
a more accurate representation.</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Best regards,</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 5:23 AM,
Jonathan Robinson <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info" target="_blank">jrobinson@afilias.info</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-IE">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Greg
and others,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Apologies,
for the slow response.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I
recall it very slightly differently in that, we
provisionally ended up with:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">The
Chartering Organisations (of the CWG) through:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><span>a)<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">The
CWG, so long as it exists, and thereafter</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><span>b)<span
style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Their
Chairs</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Jonathan</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US"> Greg Shatan [mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com"
target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.<wbr>com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 01 September 2016 22:55<br>
<b>To:</b> Seun Ojedeji <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com"
target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>></span></p>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org"
target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Possible
Definitions/Compositions of the "Names Community"</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Provisionally,
we have ended up with:</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">a)
the CWG so long as it exists, followed by</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">b)
the Chartering Organizations, acting by
their Chairs.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Greg</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:49
PM, Seun Ojedeji <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com"
target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid
#cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<p>Lost audio[1] at the time Jonathan was
making suggestions about the "names
community". I think the phrase suggested; on
behalf of "members of the CWG" may be
somewhat personal. On behalf the "chartering
organisations of CWG" may be more ideal.</p>
<p>On another note, suggestion about exploring
memberships drawn the CO to form a group
smaller than current CWG for the task is
worth exploring future.</p>
<p>Regards<br>
1. Looks like Brenda is not on her Skype
either so I couldn't get a quick redial, if
the meeting is still pretty much on I will
appreciate a dialout.</p>
<p>Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos</p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 1 Sep 2016
8:46 p.m., "Gomes, Chuck" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com"
target="_blank">cgomes@verisign.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid
#cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-US">#3 might be
worth exploring further.</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-US">Chuck</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US"> Greg Shatan
[mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com"
target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.<wbr>com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday,
September 01, 2016 2:34 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gomes, Chuck<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Seun Ojedeji; <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org"
target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a></span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
lang="EN-US"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re:
[CWG-Stewardship] Possible
Definitions/Compositions
of the "Names Community"</span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">Thank you
for these very helpful
comments.</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">We may
be overthinking things
a bit.</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">The CWG
has been acting in the
interests of the
"Names Community" and
has done some very
significant things
acting in that
capacity. Our report
and recommendations
were considered to be
and treated as the
proposal of the "Names
Community." This
isn't much more than
an implementation
detail of that
report. So thinking
that we need to come
up with a whole new
understanding of the
"Names Community" and
how to action on its
behalf on this small
aspect of our work
seems out of scale and
out of scope.</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">Much of
the operational work
will take place in the
CSC, IFR and SCWG,
with the CCG
representatives and/or
the signatory acting
primarily as a
delivery mechanism or
point of contact.
Both the CCG and the
actions taken by the
signatory will be
dependent on actions
of these other groups.</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">Overall,
I tend to agree with
Seun, that the
oversight should be
handled by the
Chartering
Organizations and to
the extent applicable,
by the methods we've
created (CSC, IFR,
SCWG) communicated by
the CCG
representatives.</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">ICANN as
the signatory also
makes sense, though
its role should be
that of a conduit.
ICANN itself should
not have an
operational role,
since the oversight
involved here is
either (a) oversight
of ICANN or (b)
oversight of an entity
contracting with ICANN
(IETF Trust). As
indicated above and in
my earlier email, we
already have
operational solutions
for most (if not all)
of the tasks of the
CCG and signatory.</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">At the
next level the
question is: how
should the Chartering
Organizations function
in order to deal with
the tasks at hand
(choosing the CCG
members, etc., etc.).
So we're back to using
or creating a group
that draws from the
Chartering
Organizations in some
fashion. This is
probably a subset of
the groups listed in
my prior email (but
without they idea that
any of them <u>are</u> the
Names Community).
Leading candidates in
my mind are:</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:47.25pt"><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">1.</span><span
style="font-size:7.0pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">The CWG</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:47.25pt"><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">2.</span><span
style="font-size:7.0pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">All of the
Chartering Organizations
of the CWG (GNSO, ccNSO,
ALAC, GAC, SSAC) but not
acting through the CWG</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:47.25pt"><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">3.</span><span
style="font-size:7.0pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">An
Implementation Oversight
Team (IOT) (drawn in
some fashion from the
CWG and/or its
Chartering
Organizations)</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:47.25pt"><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">4.</span><span
style="font-size:7.0pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">The CSC</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">Greg</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
lang="EN-US">On Thu,
Sep 1, 2016 at 1:45
PM, Gomes, Chuck <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com" target="_blank">cgomes@verisign.com</a>>
wrote:</span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-US">I
like breaking step
2 into the 2 steps
Seun suggested.</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-US">Chuck</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"
lang="EN-US"> </span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US"> Seun
Ojedeji [mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com"
target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a><wbr>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b>
Thursday,
September 01, 2016
12:53 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gomes,
Chuck<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>;
Greg Shatan</span><span
lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
lang="EN-US"><br>
<b>Subject:</b>
Re:
[CWG-Stewardship]
Possible
Definitions/Compositions
of the "Names
Community"</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">Hello,</span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">Sent
from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse
brevity and
typos</span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">On
1 Sep 2016
1:45 a.m.,
"Gomes, Chuck"
<<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com" target="_blank">cgomes@verisign.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> Greg,<br>
><br>
><br>
> I see it
as two steps:
1) define the
community; </span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">SO:
We can take
this up from
your proposed
definition
which I think
it's a good
start:</span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">“All
current and
future
stakeholders
of Internet
domain names
including
individuals
and
organizations.”</span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">2)
decide who can
best represent
that
community. </span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">SO:
I see two
aspects here:</span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">1.
Who to
represent as
signatory and
perform
operational
tasks: I
believe this
should be
ICANN</span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">2.
Who should
have an
oversight
role: I
believe this
can be the
chartering
organisations
that developed
the names
proposal which
is the CWG.</span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">><br>
Whoever that
is, they need
to understand
who the
community is
to accurately
do their job.<br>
><br>
SO: Indeed and
I believe
though the CWG
prepared the
names
proposal, it
has ensured
that it's
operations
covers the
description of
a global
community in
that anyone
with a view is
welcome to
contribute,
including
those who are
not
members/participants
of CWG.</span></p>
<p><span
lang="EN-US">Regards<br>
> <br>
><br>
> Chuck<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> From:
Greg Shatan
[mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.<wbr>com</a>]
<br>
> Sent:
Wednesday,
August 31,
2016 7:32 PM<br>
> To:
Gomes, Chuck<br>
> Cc: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
> Subject:
Re:
[CWG-Stewardship]
Possible
Definitions/Compositions
of the "Names
Community"<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Chuck,<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Thanks
for getting
the ball
rolling.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>
Philosophically
you may well
be right, but
I don't think
that is a
practical
answer under
these
circumstances.
It does
however help
clarify and
tighten the
question,
always a good
thing in the
search for an
answer.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> The need
for a
definition or
identification
of the Names
Community is
driven by the
need for some
group (or
group of
groups) to
take various
actions on
behalf of the
Names
Community
(outlined in
my email).
The way the
Agreement is
structured it
may appear to
ask for a
definition of
the Names
Community.
Thinking about
this after
your email, I
think what we
need to find
(or create)
instead is a
valid
representative group
(or group of
groups) that
can act on
behalf of the
Names
Community in
the context of
this
Agreement.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Consider
the following:<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> How would
the community
you suggest
(All current
and future
stakeholders
of Internet
domain names
including
individuals
and
organizations)
take the
actions needed
underthe
Community
Agreement ?<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>
Approached
another way,
assuming for
the moment
that you have
correctly
defined the
"Names
Community,"
broadly
speaking, what
group (or
group of
groups) would
(practically
speaking) best
represent this
Community?<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> As a
corollary,
consider that
the IANA
transition
transfers
oversight of
certain
critical
Internet
functions from
the NTIA to
the "Global
Multistakeholder
Community" --
a community
even broader
than the Names
Community.
Yet we have
(imperfectly
perhaps)
determined
that various
existing
bodies (and
some newly
formed
combinations
of these
bodies) will
adequately
represent the
"global
multistakeholder
community" in
exercising
stewardship
and
accountability
functions.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> As
another
corollary,
consider how
the Numbers
Community and
Protocol
Parameters
Community are
defined in
this Agreement
-- as the
Regional
Internet
Registries
(and as the
NRO) and the
IETF
respectively.
Consider how
the definition
you propose
compares to
these
definitions.
Alternatively
consider how
the NRO and
the IETF
compare with
the following
parallel
definitions:<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Numbers
Community: All
current and
future
stakeholders
of Internet IP
address
numbers
including
individuals
and
organizations<br>
><br>
> RIRs: All
current and
future
stakeholders
of Internet
protocol
parameters
including
individuals
and
organizations<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> While
these
definitions
are not
incorrect, and
are certainly
far broader
than the NRO
and the IETF,
they are not
being used in
the Community
Agreement, and
could not
practically be
used in the
Community
Agreement.
Instead we
need to rely
on groups that
are
(hopefully)
representative
of those
communities,
while not
being selected
by those
(much) larger
communities.
We need to do
the same thing
here for the
Names
Community.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Greg<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> On Wed,
Aug 31, 2016
at 7:08 PM,
Gomes, Chuck
<<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com" target="_blank">cgomes@verisign.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> Thanks
for getting
this started
Greg. Here
are my first
reactions.<br>
><br>
> ·
I think
everyone one
of these leave
some members
of the name
community out.<br>
><br>
> ·
Most of them
are what I
think are
legitimate
subsets of the
‘Names
Community’.<br>
><br>
> ·
It doesn’t
seem to me
that the
‘Names
Community’ has
to be a
structure; in
fact I think
it may be
difficult to
find or create
a structure
inside or
outside ICANN
that would
include all
members of the
‘Names
Community’.<br>
><br>
> ·
A general
definition may
be the best
way to go, one
that doesn’t
try to list
specific
members
because as
soon as we do
that we will
likely leave
some out.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Here is
my initial
suggestion:
“All current
and future
stakeholders
of Internet
domain names
including
individuals
and
organizations.”
I welcome
critique of my
thoughts and
my suggestion.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Chuck<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> From: <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.<wbr>org</a>
[mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-<wbr>bounces@icann.org</a>]
On Behalf Of
Greg Shatan<br>
> Sent:
Wednesday,
August 31,
2016 6:00 PM<br>
> To: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
> Subject:
[CWG-Stewardship] Possible Definitions/Compositions of the "Names
Community"<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> On our
last call, I
volunteered to
put together
this email.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> We need
to define or
identify the
composition of
the "Names
Community" for
purposes of
the IANA IPR
Community
Agreement.
The role of
the Names
Community in
this Agreement
is outlined
below.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Here are
some
non-exhaustive
possibilities
for the "Names
Community,"
which I am
throwing out
without any
judgment as to
their
appropriateness
and in no
particular
order: <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> The CWG<br>
> All of
the Chartering
Organizations
of the CWG
(GNSO, ccNSO,
ALAC, GAC,
SSAC) but not
acting through
the CWG<br>
> An
Implementation
Oversight Team
(IOT) (drawn
in some
fashion from
the CWG and/or
its Chartering
Organizations)<br>
> GNSO and
ccNSO<br>
> GNSO,
ccNSO and
ALAC <br>
> GNSO,
ccNSO and GAC<br>
> GNSO,
ccNSO, ALAC
and GAC<br>
> Any other
combination of
some but not
all Chartering
Organizations<br>
> The CSC
(representing
those
organizations
and in the
proportions
represented on
the CSC)<br>
> The
organizations
contributing
members to the
CSC (but not
necessarily
acting through
the CSC or in
the
proportions
represented in
the CSC)<br>
> Any other
combination of
ICANN-created
structures<br>
> An
existing
non-ICANN-created
structure<br>
> A
combination of
ICANN-created
and non-ICANN
created
structures<br>
> A
completely new
structure<br>
><br>
> ICANN
(the
corporation)
will be the
signatory on
behalf of the
"Names
Community." <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> The
"Names
Community"
(and not ICANN
the
corporation)
will need to
be responsible
for the
substance of
all Names
Community
actions under
the Community
Agreement and
instructing
its CCG
representatives
where
appropriate,
including:<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>
Appointing,
removing and
replacing
three members
of the CCG
(Community
Coordinating
Group)
representing
the Names
Community<br>
>
Appointing one
of the three
Names
Community
members as a
Co-Chair and
primary point
of contact for
the IETF Trust<br>
>
Determining
whether the
IANA Services
are consistent
with the
standards set
forth by the
Names
Community
(determined
through a
"specified
process of
community
engagement,
feedback,
contract and
dispute
resolution,"
which is
expected to be
the CSC, and
when the time
comes, the IFR
process)<br>
>
Instructing
the CCG
Representatives<br>
> Notifying
the IETF Trust
that the IANA
Operator
(initially,
ICANN) is
being
replaced.
(This would be
the result of
a SCWG
decision.)<br>
>
Requesting
that the IETF
Trust enter
into an IANA
IPR License
Agreement with
a new IANA
Operator and
participating
in these
interactions/negotiations
(particularly
if the Trust
or the
Operator wants
to vary the
terms of the
License
Agreement)
including
mediation if
the parties
are unable to
come to an
agreement on
terms of the
new License
Agreement<br>
>
Monitoring the
IANA
Operator’s use
of the IANA
IPR with
respect to its
designated
IANA Service
for the
purposes of
quality
control under
the License
Agreement and
notifying the
IETF Trust of
any failures
or
deficiencies
in the quality
of service
provided by
the IANA
Operator that
would violate
such quality
control
provisions
(again, this
is likely to
be CSC/IFR
work in
substance).<br>
> Being
consulted
(through the
CCG Co-Chair)
by the IETF
Trust if the
Trust believes
the IANA
Operator has
materially
breached the
terms of its
License
Agreement.<br>
>
Withdrawing
from the
Community
Agreement<br>
> Selecting
or creating a
new entity to
replace ICANN
as the
signatory to
this Agreement
on behalf of
the Names
Community
(which could
be a
responsibility
of the CWG or
some successor
to the CWG)<br>
>
Determining a
process for
doing each of
the above (to
the extent it
doesn't fall
into an
existing group
with a process
for doing
things)<br>
><br>
> Please
respond to
this email
with any
thoughts you
have on the
possible ways
(including
additional
ways) to
identify/define
the Names
Community for
this purpose,
and with any
questions you
may have (and
any answers
you may have,
as well).<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Please
keep in mind
the relatively
limited
purposes for
which this
needs to be
answered (just
dealing with
the Community
Agreement) and
the very
limited
time-frame we
have to figure
this out (at
least,
initially).<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Thank you
for your
consideration
of these
issues.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Best
regards,<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Greg<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
><br>
>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
>
CWG-Stewardship
mailing list<br>
> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship"
target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
--------------
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 771 2472987</pre>
</body>
</html>