[Accountability-dt] Updated version for review & outstanding action items

Wed Oct 29 21:59:20 UTC 2014

All,
thanks for your contributions. DT members please do take a look at the draft and provide additional input and suggestions for wording. 

I am still concerned that the wording for work stream 1 goes beyond what has been requested by Mr. Strickling. Also, I think the wording on the stress tests needs further discussion. 

It would be great to have the collection of statements particularly from Mr. Strickling for our call tomorrow as I was under the impression that he wanted to clarify the statements made in Istanbul and narrowed down the requirements for work stream 1. However, the suggested language seems to be based on the statements from the Istanbul IGF. We should double-check on this. 

I am looking forward to our discussion tomorrow.

Kind regards,
Thomas

Am 29.10.2014 um 19:30 schrieb Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org>:

> Thanks David - a few additional edits and comments for consideration on top of yours.
> 
> Matthew
> 
> On 10/29/2014 3:45 PM, Fares, David wrote:
>> Thanks to everyone who contributed to the revised draft.  As mentioned on our last call, I have a meeting outside of the office tomorrow and will not be able to join you.  I have provided several edits in the attached document that try to create consistency with the roles for workstream 1 and 2.  Please let me know if you have any questions.
>>  
>> From: accountability-dt-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-dt-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf OfMarika Konings
>> Sent: 29 October 2014 11:25
>> To: Marika Konings; accountability-dt at icann.org
>> Subject: [Accountability-dt] Updated version for review & outstanding action items
>>  
>> Dear All,
>>  
>> Please find attached the latest version of the charter which includes the language circulated earlier this week by Mathieu, the language of the board resolution in section V and the proposed removal of references to the ICG in section V that were a left-over from the IANA Stewardship Transition charter (apologies for not spotting these before). To facilitate your review, I’ve attached a redline as well as clean version. Please note that the following action items are still outstanding:
>> DT members to review issues collated in public comment period and phrase those into questions that can be included for each work stream - Keith volunteered to work with RySG to develop a first list of questions for DT review. Matthew volunteered to assist with this as well.
>> Avri to review deliverables section and suggest additional edits based on comments received, if needed
>> Please note that Mathieu has also provided alternative language for section III concerning the work plan. You are encouraged to review the two versions and indicate whether you have a preference for one or the other.
>>  
>> If there are any other issues that need to be considered or alternative language you would like to propose, please share these with the DT before the next meeting which is scheduled for Thursday 30 October at 13.00 UTC.
>>  
>> Best regards,
>>  
>> Marika
>>  
>> From: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
>> Date: Monday 27 October 2014 22:29
>> To: "accountability-dt at icann.org" <accountability-dt at icann.org>
>> Subject: [Accountability-dt] For your review - notes & action items and updated version of charter
>>  
>> Dear All,
>>  
>> Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting as well as attached the latest version of the charter which incorporates the changes discussed during today’s meeting.
>>  
>> As a reminder, the action items are as follows:
>> Mathieu to draft language to update problem statement - need to close gap in accountability (trust of stakeholders in current accountability mechanisms - not deemed sufficient, part of which needs to be addressed  prior to transition, part of which can be done after. Expand in goals section what the CWG is expected to achieve. Following that, Mathieu will review other parts of the document to make sure these align (including work stream 1 and 2 descriptions)
>> Staff to collate Larry Stricklyn's & Fadi's statements/comments from recent speeches related to this effort
>> DT members to review issues collated in public comment period and phrase those into questions that can be included for each work stream - Keith volunteered to work with RySG to develop a first list of questions for DT review. Matthew volunteered to assist with this as well.
>> Avri to review deliverables section and suggest additional edits based on comments received, if needed
>> Update draft language in working relationship with CCWG and ICG to reflect comments received (done)
>> Next meeting has been scheduled for Thursday 30 October at 13.00 UTC
>> Please use the attached version for any further edits / comments.
>>  
>> Thanks,
>>  
>> Marika
>>  
>> Notes and Action Items – DT meeting of 27 October
>>  
>> Reminder of target date for delivery of charter: 3 November 2014
>>  
>> Recap of changes made to Charter since last meeting: 
>> Latest version includes most up to date changes (including Matthew Keith, and David today)
>> Edits to fix some left over references to ICG where no longer appropriate as well as updates to reflect that more than one proposal may be submitted by the ICG as the two work streams are likely to be completed along different timelines
>> SOI clarification
>> Clarification about ATRT role in concensus calls
>> Review of charter:
>> Include definition of the term "accountability" in the Charter (from NETmundial Statement): "Accountable: Mechanisms for independent checks and balances as well asfor review and redress should exist."
>> Question concerning scope: 
>> What is demarcation between WS1 and WS2?
>> Focus on pre-transition vs. post-transition accountability as opposed to IANA vs. non-IANA?
>> The reference  to IANA Functions accountability is being dealt with by the other CCWG. This group should be focused on accountability reforms made necessary by NTIA's disengagement from its legacy role.
>> ICANN's accountability to the community as a whole may need to be reflected in the charter - is there a conflict between currently proposed definitions of work streams & scope?
>> NTIA oversight created accountability across ICANN - how to recreate that general accountability mechanism prior to any transition. 
>> Everything should be on the table for consideration - up to the CCWG to determine what should be done before transition and what can wait until after. 
>> Recommendations coming out of work stream 1 are expected to provide a path for work going on in work stream 2. Process for addressing anything coming up in work stream 2 is one of the objectives of work stream 1. 
>> Transition of role of US Government is at the heart of the work of the CCWG and also dictates timeline / sense of urgency - if scope is too wide it risks the effort to get lost
>> See challenges identified by Larry Strickling in his speech
>> Stress test one of the key deliverables of CCWG
>> DT Agreements;
>> Delineation between work stream 1 and 2 should be pre and post transition
>> Charter should not limit accountability mechanisms or functions affected as part of the CCWG work 
>> Deliverables, timeframes & reporting
>> Proposed edits from Avri (see document circulated)
>> Two additions proposed: 1) when solutions are proposed, deliverables need to include stress test, scenarios to demonstrate that the solutions are resistent to capture / stress; 2) after assessing current situation, priorities need to be identified - what is required before transition and what can wait until after (big impact vs. limited impact) (Avri tried to capture these as part of her edits which will be shared with the DT shortly)
>> Do stress tests need to be defined or conducted prior to transition? At least for stream 1, this should be a requirement to be conducted in theory. For work stream 2, may not be required, or at least not in the short run.
>> Stress test - proposals that demonstrate on paper how they would resist 'stress' (capture, financial crisis) - incl. list of nightmare scenarios. What are the stresses that were tested and how the various mechanisms enable ICANN survive these 'stresses'. 
>> Membership
>> Include as a for example, the link to criteria identified for the community working group (seehttps://www.icann.org/resources/pages/enhancing-accountability-faqs-2014-08-22-en#12)
>> Working relationship with ICG / IANA Stewardship CWG
>> Consider including reference to regular meetings between chairs
>> Clarify the role of the board (not related to co-ordination, but to final approval of proposals) - include link to board resolution
>> Review this section and consider clarifying
>> Main focus should be on IANA Stewardship Transition CWG as ICG just has a co-ordinating role
>> Expert Advisors
>> Section captures comments provided by Mathieu
>> Action item:
>> Mathieu to draft language to update problem statement - need to close gap in accountability (trust of stakeholders in current accountability mechanisms - not deemed sufficient, part of which needs to be addressed  prior to transition, part of which can be done after. Expand in goals section what the CWG is expected to achieve. Following that, Mathieu will review other parts of the document to make sure these align (including work stream 1 and 2 descriptions)
>> Staff to collate Larry Stricklyn's & Fadi's statements/comments from recent speeches related to this effort
>> DT members to review issues collated in public comment period and phrase those into questions that can be included for each work stream - Keith volunteered to work with RySG to develop a first list of questions for DT review. Matthew volunteered to assist with this as well.
>> Avri to review deliverables section and suggest additional edits based on comments received, if needed
>> Update draft language in working relationship with CCWG and ICG to reflect comments received
>> Next meeting has been scheduled for Thursday 30 October at 13.00 UTC
>> This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information. It is intended solely for the named addressee. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to the addressee), you may not copy or deliver this message or its attachments to anyone. Rather, you should permanently delete this message and its attachments and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. Any content of this message and its attachments that does not relate to the official business of Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc. or its subsidiaries must be taken not to have been sent or endorsed by any of them. No representation is made that this email or its attachments are without defect. 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-dt mailing list
>> Accountability-dt at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-dt
> 
> -- 
> Matthew Shears
> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
> mshears at cdt.org
> + 44 771 247 2987
> <ICANN IANA USG Transition Accountability CCWG Charter Draft Rev3 DF Comments 29Oct14-1 shears.docx>_______________________________________________
> Accountability-dt mailing list
> Accountability-dt at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-dt

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-dt/attachments/20141029/6448a300/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-dt/attachments/20141029/6448a300/signature-0001.asc>