[CWG-Stewardship] Transition Proposal v.3 -- Edits due on Sunday at 23:59 UTC

Milton L Mueller mueller at syr.edu
Mon Jun 8 15:28:10 UTC 2015

I support many of the edits/changes that Jonathan proposed, but would highlight in particular this one:

·         Paragraph 112 (PTI board) replace the word "could" with "must"

Also, in same paragraph delete the phrase "(who may or may not be members of the ICANN Board)". As noted during the phone conversations, some of us do not consider ICANN board members to be independent enough, but others may not agree. So I suggest not mentioning it specifically.

Para 116: Chuck notes that something is missing or awkward about this phrase in
the changing relationship post-IANA Stewardship Transition

·         ...it should be "the changing relationship between IANA and ICANN."

Referring to comments by Andrew Sullivan I agree that the removal of the word "naming" from ¶406 (Annex L) would be a mistake. Although we want all the current IANA functions, resources and staff to be transferred to PTI, the separation process described in Annex L would ONLY apply to the naming related functions.

In that vein, I would have real trouble with Martin's suggestion that in Paragraph 108 that "it [would] be easier to grant the PTI rights to use while keeping these under the rights of ICANN?" This undermines the whole PTI model, which was to create a separate corporate affiliate, not a mere "right to use" relationship. I don't think we should be fiddling with fundamental elements of the model at this point.


From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2015 5:58 PM
To: 'Gomes, Chuck'; 'Grace Abuhamad'; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Transition Proposal v.3 -- Edits due on Sunday at 23:59 UTC

I chose to layer my edits onto Chuck's redline.
That way, staff have a single document that contains both.

I trust that this is helpful.

Thank you to everyone for hard work and a comprehensive proposal which  has emerged.


From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes at verisign.com]
Sent: 06 June 2015 01:15
To: Grace Abuhamad; cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Transition Proposal v.3 -- Edits due on Sunday at 23:59 UTC

My input on Proposal v.3 is highlighted in the attached file.  Note in all cases where I suggested edits I also entered a comment except in one footnote where I made a very minor edit and Word wouldn't let me insert a comment.


From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Grace Abuhamad
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 12:07 AM
To: cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Transition Proposal v.3 -- Edits due on Sunday at 23:59 UTC

Dear all,

Attached is the updated proposal. This version includes the edits listed below. Your comments are requested and welcome until Sunday 23:59 UTC. If you don't have time to read the whole proposal, I've highlighted specific areas in the document that require feedback.

Areas that require feedback:

  *   Paragraph 164 (p.32): needs text
  *   Paragraph 172 (p.34): DT-F to confirm edit
  *   Section IV edits should be reviewed by CWG (Andrew perhaps?)
  *   Section VI edits should be reviewed by CWG (Avri perhaps?)
  *   Footnote (p.65): DT-N to respond to Sidley about status of footnote
  *   Page 73: DT-C to confirm response to Sidley comment
  *   Page 80: DT-M to review footnote
  *   Page 81: DT-M/DT-C to comment on Sidley note
  *   Paragraph 389 (p.92): DT-N/SR/X to define "Review Team Liaison" per Sidley's comment
  *   Page 111 & 112: Bernard to address Sidley comments
Edits included in version 3:

  *   All the comments & edits from Greg, Avri, Sidley, Lise and Andrew.
  *   The following items from today's call:

     *   Paragraph 123 has been reviewed to be internally consistent
     *   Paragraph 141: adjusted text around CCWG-Accountability structure
     *   Paragraph 167: removed sentence
     *   Paragraph 170: Removed the word "multistakholder" and use 'customer-based' instead)
     *    Added footnote to paragraph 169 about .INT (footnote is also in Annex to section II)
     *   Paragraph 275: fixed composition of IFRT (and also fixed this in SCWG composition)
     *   Annex S: Added disclaimer about term sheet

  *   DT C Charter updates (see Section III and Annex G)
  *   Section IV edits
  *   Section VI edits
As you know, we had a technical glitch with document versions right before the call yesterday. In recovering the version, there were a lot of formatting changes that had to be done. I have attached version 2.5 (the in-between version) so that you have it, but please note that version 3 is the version to work off of.  There are still lots of formatting fixes in version 3, but we will work on these over the weekend and on Monday.

We are almost there!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150608/f613cf6b/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the CWG-Stewardship mailing list