[IOTF] IOTF Call #6 - Meeting Notes (20 April 2016 @ 19:00 UTC)

Yuko Green yuko.green at icann.org
Wed Apr 20 21:49:59 UTC 2016

Dear members of the IOTF,


Please see below the meeting notes and chat history from today's IOTF call.
The presentation material is now posted at
https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation under "Meetings & Work
Sessions" section. The audio recording and transcript will be made available
within the next few days. Unfortunately due to technical issue, the
AdobeConnect room recording was not completed though the recording was
started at the beginning of the call. We are working with IT to identify the
issue to avoid this from happening on the future calls. My apology for this


***Meeting Notes***


Implementation Oversight Task Force (ITOF) call #6

20 April 2016 @ 19:00 UTC


Please note that this meeting is being recorded. 

To mute or Unmute, select *6 (Star-Six)


If you would like to review the last call(s), the recordings and
presentation materials are posted publicly here:




1.       Opening Remarks

2.       Implementation Items

PTI Formation Document Review process

IANA Escalation Mechanisms

3.       AOB

Paul Kane's question

RZMA question

4.       Closing Remarks



PTI Formation documents are:

- Bylaws

- Articles of Incorporation

- Conflict of Interest Policy


Action Items:

- Share Document Review Process & Timeline slide with Client Committee to
discuss their involvement and Sidley's. (ICANN)

- Share PTI formation documents term sheets with Client Committee (and
potentially with Sidley). (ICANN)

- IANA CS Complaint Resolution Process - is the CEO step no longer part of
the process? Chuck will look into the question raised and get back to this
group via the email list. (Chuck Gomes)

- IANA Problem Resolution Process - Annex J - Flowchart 1 and 3 have the
same title but one swimlane different. Chuck will look into it and get back
to this group via the email list. (Chuck Gomes)

- Section 7 & 8 of annex C: could be included in the ICANN Bylaws, PTI
bylaws or in the ICANN-PTI contract. ICANN to flag this item with lawyers to
make sure it gets included. (ICANN)

- Share the rough timeline of implementation item documents during the next
call (ICANN)

- Review the ICANN Bylaws for the mentioning of the ICANN-PTI contract



***Chat History***


James Gannon: Will we have audio in the AC room for the call?


James Gannon: Yup can hear 


Lise Fuhr: Good evening


Chuck Gomes: I am 3200.


Allan MacGillivray: Tht's me at 5335


Paul Kane: To be clear there will there be PTI Bylaws as it is a seperate
affilaite company


Paul Kane: ?


Alissa Cooper: What section of the bylaws will the PTI Purpose be drawn


Jonathan Robinson: Apologeis for late arrival


Jonathan Robinson: Had a minor IT glitch


Nathalie Vergnolle: Yes, there will be separate PTI bylaws


Paul Kane: Thanks Nathalie


Yuko Green: @Alissa, that would be are covered in Section 16.2 and Annex D
(Articles 1 &2).


Lise Fuhr: Thank you Trang


Yuko Green: @Alissa, the language was circulated via IOTF mail on 15 April


Alissa Cooper: ok, thanks, will find it


matthew shears: + 1 Paul on PTI bylaws


Paul Kane: Agree Trang


Paul Kane: This group is here to help you get it right then it needs
ratification by the groups CWG/SO etc


matthew shears: agree bylaws and AoI should go to Sidley


matthew shears: + 1 Chuck


Paul Kane: Chuck agree


Greg Shatan: With my clilent committee hat on, I'm happy to step in to the
review at that point, suggeted by Chuck.


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): agree  totally  Jonathan


Jonathan Robinson: Reminder of the role of client committee. Not a committee
to take decisions but to facilitate effective interaction with the lawyers
to ensure that we use them efficiently / cost-effectively.


Lise Fuhr: @Jonathan agree


Avri Doria: wasn't this the CSC group. 


matthew shears: seems unusual that it would go to GDD


James Gannon: Agree Matt


Donna Austin, Neustar: @Avri, wasn't what the CSC group?


matthew shears: PTYI BOard is not on the escalation path in the slide


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): hmmm


matthew shears: PTI Board would come after the IANA functions manager as the
IANA functions manager is on the PTI Board if I recall correctly


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): that resonates Matthrw


Donna Austin, Neustar: This is for individual complaints


Jonathan Robinson: What does the reference CWG 1367 mean?


Paul Kane: How long wil this take?  If there is a problem there needs to be
a quick fix .....


Avri Doria: i guess i am missing the problem here.  this seems to accurately
reflect stage 1.


Avri Doria: i do not think it was an omission


James Gannon: Its actually para 367 in our proosal Johnathan


James Gannon: *proposal


Avri Doria: 1367


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO):  the proposed 


Yuko Green: 1367 refers to the paragraph number from ICG proposal


Jonathan Robinson: Thanks Yuko. I was looking for the reference in the
original CWG proposal


matthew shears: If this is for individuals the proposed escalation path on
the screen makes sense


matthew shears: (not the current one)


Paul Kane: Today there is GDD - but tomorrow there will be PTI Board


Yuko Green: @jonathan, that would be paragraph 367 from CWG proposal


Jonathan Robinson: Thank-you Yukp


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): yes Avri  thus the *proposed*


Alan Greenberg: I have no problem with the ICANN CEO being removed. Was just
curious that it was there today.


Paul Kane: Agree Avri .... no longer there


Donna Austin, Neustar: @Alan - I think it is at the complainant's discretion
to take their complaint to the ICANN President & CEO, something anyone can
do, not just as it relates to IANA


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): THX Chuck  


matthew shears: + 1 Avri and + 1 Paul on speed and efficiency


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): agree Donna


Paul Kane: Donna - redelegation will (likely) be settled in Court - but
technical operations need to involve The Managemnt of PTI- ie the Board


Avri Doria: agree with Donna and that is a reasonable option


James Gannon: Yes for emercengy technical issues there is the 24x7
escalation process


Avri Doria: i think the right hand table corresponds to what we included in
the plan.


James Gannon: +1 Avri


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): YUP  


Donna Austin, Neustar: I think the short answer to Trang's quesiton is there
was no oversight.


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): I will say again  *the proposal*


Allan MacGillivray: +1 Jonathan on agreeing to the current CWG proposal
(right hand chart) and moving on.  The IANA Functions Manager can always
discuss this with the CEO.  So, let's move on.


Avri Doria: while the PRI may be a service provider to GDD, i did not think
the IFPM would be a report of the GDD president except in so far as the GDD
prez is on PTI board.


Avri Doria: ... PTI ...


Avri Doria: they wanted to be sure there was no oversight.  good due


Donna Austin, Neustar: @Alan, it was an example


Donna Austin, Neustar: a bad one, but just an example. 


Paul Kane: ccTLD are not ICANN - they are local and IANA confirm local and
report to ICANN 


Alan Greenberg: @Donna, yes, but one that I tdon't think is possible, so was
curious if I was missing something.


Alan Greenberg: @Paul, yes, but ultimately IANA only takes action after
action of the ICANN Board - today.


Alan Greenberg: ICANN Boardpresumably verifying that local issues meet RFC


Donna Austin, Neustar: @Alan, I was looking for examples at short notice and
used a bad one.


Paul Kane: ICANN verify that the ransfer is correct (ie Registrants have
been safely transferred)  - ie stability of the ccTLD users


Paul Kane: Secure and stability of the DNS .....


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): Alan   reefer back nee to the FOI  for
Delegations  lokking to both RFC 1591 and the GAC Priciples relsting to


Alan Greenberg: @Donna :-)


Paul Kane: Bylaws... makes most sense... Thanks


James Gannon: Para 264 for refernce


Paul Kane: Thanks Trang


Donna Austin, Neustar: I have to drop from the call. thanks all


Alissa Cooper: I have a different question to ask under AOB, if we have time


Lise Fuhr: I have to leave at the top of the hour


Paul Kane: Note taker - It is ICANN Bylaws and also PTI bylaws


matthew shears: + 1 Alissa - both sets of bylaws are key


Yuko Green: @Paul, thank you


Paul Kane: THanks .... Yuko ( remove Either)


Paul Kane: Thasnk


Yuko Green: Thank you Paul


James Gannon: I dont think that the CCWG would provide much control over
ICANNs ability to create and modify contracts


Alissa Cooper: it is currently referenced in 1.1(d), but not for the effect
that Chuck was describing


James Gannon: Unless the wording was places directly into the bylaws and not
just a reference


James Gannon: +1 Paul


James Gannon: Yes that it being done in other areas


Paul Kane: Thanks all


James Gannon: thanks all


Jonathan Robinson: Thank-you Trang


Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): Thnks everyone...Bye


Greg Shatan: Bye all!


Yuko Green

Strategic Programs Manager

Global Domains Division

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)


Direct Line:  +1 310 578 8693

Mobile: +1 310 745 1517

E-mail:   <mailto:yuko.green at icann.org> yuko.green at icann.org

 <http://www.icann.org/> www.icann.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iotf/attachments/20160420/3814ccc2/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5096 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iotf/attachments/20160420/3814ccc2/smime-0001.p7s>

More information about the IOTF mailing list