[DTL] Notes from DT-L Call on 8 April at 13:00 UTC

[Allan MacGillivray]

Further to our call, this is what I propose for recommendations for DTL:

DT-L Recommendations
That:

  1.  the transition framework outlined in this document be further developed into a detailed, fully functional, transition plan within 24  months of the date of implementation of the overall IANA stewardship transition;
  2.  the budget for IANA operations be augmented with specific funding for the detailed transition plan development referred to in 1;
  3.  the process established for the potential transitioning of the IANA functions to an operator  other than ICANN (the escalation process) specifically recognize that the detailed transition plan referred to in 1 must be in place before the commencement of the transitioning process, and
  4.  (KSK recommendations from Jaap/Guru)






From: dt4-bounces at icann.org [mailto:dt4-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad
Sent: April-08-15 9:46 AM
To: dt4 at icann.org
Subject: [DTL] Notes from DT-L Call on 8 April at 13:00 UTC

Dear all,
Notes from today's call are below:

DT-L Call on 8 April at 13:00 UTC

Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QRiXP9-nxM-h8FgJ_FyM962EwdjnRESrDT2jOtlRZZ0/edit?usp=sharing

Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/DT-L+Transition+Plan

Members of DT-L include:
James Gannon -- apologies
Guru Acharya
Matthew Shears
Christopher Wilkinson -- not in attendance
Jaap Akkerhuis
Allan MacGillivray
Graeme Bunton

Notes:
Scale back ambitions for the time-being and focus on current transition plan plan.

Suggestion to meet Friday's deadline is to:

  *   use the template and evolve it based on the current transition plan;
  *   elaborate on the high-level principles; and
  *   look at other dependencies with DTs (and other communities)
  *   elaborate a set of recommendations for how the plan should evolve post transition

Action (Matthew): Capture David's comments on DT-L. Also will want to run this template by him tomorrow.

Dependencies with other DTs:
DT-O (Budget) will not be addressing budget costs for transition plan.

DT-M (Escalation): one of their escalation steps may at some point be a RFP or separation, but the detail is not being addressed.
Currently the escalation step relating to RFP says '6. Initiate RFP or [Process mechanism yet to be defined] [Pending Legal Advice & Fundamental Bylaw definition in CCWG]'
--> DT-L could recommend a process for transition
Action (Allan): draft recommendations for escalation related aspects (will circulate on mailing list)

DT-N (Periodic Review) could also be related.

Things to note/edit in the document:
- Scaling back from original plan to write a new transition plan, and instead focusing on the current transition plan and additions to it
- Have not received C.7.2 but submitted a DIDP request for it (submitted an received two other DIDP requests)

Action (Jaap): draft text and recommendations for KSK rollover.
Action (Guru): go over initial concerns (6 point in an email about the trasition plan) and see if addressed in draft.

Analysis of Transition Plan:
'Document Structure' needs to refer to new proposal structure
Transition Actions
'Deliverables not requiring transition' -- note the DIDP request for C.7.2

At best, we'll have a framework for a transition. What DT-L produces can be taken to another level at a later point.

Deadline for edits to document in 24h. Aim for 13:00 UTC on 9 April. This way, Matthew will send text to David for review/feedback.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt4/attachments/20150408/d312df4e/attachment-0001.html>