[CWG-Stewardship] My concerns with the draft proposal and an alternative option

[Avri Doria]

On 01-Dec-14 19:22, Greg Shatan wrote:
>
>     I fail to understand to how it can take action on problems if it
>     is not an ongoing entity.
>
>
> GS:  I think that it is fairly clear that the PRT has to be in a state
> of readiness in order to deal with "non-periodic" events. On the other
> hand, we don't want the PRT to feel the need to justify its existence
> or fill monthly meeting agendas or expand its scope.  These can be
> controlled by the PRT's organizing documents (perhaps a charter).

I very much agree with the sentiment.

While  I beleive that it can be called into service rather quickly, look
at how quickly the ICG was constituted, this does not not need to be a
deal killer.  There could be condition put in its charter that restricts
the ability of the  MRT to give itself further powers or scope, with
clauses saying that while it is constituted on, lets say, a yearly basis
and on call should the CSC raise an alert, it does not meet unless it is
there is an issue. 

avri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141202/17bc5aa5/attachment.html>