[CCWG-ACCT] CWG Meeting Notes related to expectations from CCWG
Mathieu Weill
mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
Wed Apr 15 08:34:54 UTC 2015
Dear Colleagues,
I am pasting below the notes of CWG Meeting #40 which addressed the
topics of expectations towards our group.
This is of course very relevant to our work, in terms of drafting our
recommendations as well as the consideration of our workplan and timeline.
Best,
Mathieu
-------- Message transféré --------
Sujet : [CWG-Stewardship] Notes Meeting #40 at 14:00 UTC
Date : Tue, 14 Apr 2015 21:51:43 +0000
De : Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org>
Pour : cwg-stewardship at icann.org <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
4. Instructions for CCWG?
• ICANN budget (in particular, the requirement for transparency around
cost allocation in relation to the IANA functions)
Response: The CWG supports the idea of budget veto tool, and the CWG
expects the CCWG to deliver on this ability for the community to veto
the budget. Furthermore, with regards to the details to be provided in
relation to the IANA budget, the CWG is expected to recommend as part of
its transition plan that:
1. The IANA Function’s comprehensive costs should be transparent for any
future state of the IANA Function.
2. Future FY ICANN Operating Plans & Budgets, and if possible even the
FY16 ICANN Operating Plan & Budget, include at a minimum itemization of
all IANA operations costs in the FY ICANN Operating Plan & Budget to the
project level and below as needed.
• Community empowerment mechanisms (in particular, relating to a
confidence vote option) –
Response: As part of the structure that the CWG is currently considering
(Internal accountability hybrid model: legal separation variant), the
CWG will be relying on the community empowerment and accountability
mechanisms that the CCWG is considering such as the ability to review of
ICANN Board decisions on the IANA periodic review performance (PRF);
approve or reject board decisions on PRF as well as the related creation
of a stakeholder community / member group to trigger these kinds of
abilities. As such the CWG wants to emphasize again the interlinkage and
interdependence between the two groups and the need to continue close
co-operation and regular information sharing.
• Review and redress mechanisms (in particular, relating to a
'fundamental bylaw' mechanism)
Response: The CWG is expected to recommend that a periodic review of the
IANA functions is scheduled to take place no later than every 5 years
and would operate in a manner analogous to an AOC review. As the CWG
understands that the CCWG is working on incorporating other periodic
reviews as mandated by the AoC, the CWG would like to know whether an
IANA Periodic Review could be incorporated as part of those efforts.
Further details on the mechanics of such a review are available and can
be shared should the CCWG confirm that this is indeed something that can
be incorporated as part of the CCWG’s efforts.
• Appeal mechanisms (especially with regard to ccTLD related issues)
Response: The CWG recommends that the CCWG should be mindful of the
recommendations of the CWG in relation to an appeals mechanism for
ccTLDs and the survey results that led to this recommendation which
notes that ccTLDs may decide to develop their own appeals mechanism
regarding re/delegation at a later date (post-transition). As such, any
appeal mechanism developed by the CCWG should not cover ccTLD delegation
/ re-delegation issues as these are expected to be developed by the
ccTLD community through the appropriate processes. However, the CWG does
want to emphasize the importance and need for an appeal mechanism to
cover any other issues that may involve IANA and notes that this is
option is expected to be specifically called out as one of the possible
escalation mechanisms in the draft transition proposal.
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list