[CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs

[Gomes, Chuck]

I do not think that Design Team J (CSC/MRT confidentiality and the perception of conflicts of interest) should be merged with Design Team I (Competition policy and Conflicts of Interest).  Proposed Team I involves policy.  Proposed Team J concerns specific procedures that will need to be developed for the CSC or CSC like body.

Design Team M (Escalation Mechanisms beyond CSC) seems to overlap with Design Team C (CSC), especially the following items listed for C:

*         (e) Specify an instruction for CSC, describing remedial action in the event of poor performance of IANA against specified SLAs.

*         (g) Consider whether it would be appropriate for the CSC to be an initial point of escalation for TLD operators who are experiencing IANA performance issues.
It may be that Team M would make a natural follow-up to Team C or that M could be subsumed by C.

Chuck

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 5:50 PM
To: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Updated version of the Status Overview for the CWG DTs


All,



Please see attached for a status update on the Design Teams in preparation for our call tomorrow.



Lise and I have reviewed the whole DT landscape and the current status is reflected in the document.



Please note that it contains the following:



*         A status for each DT per the model of the step-by-step process which has been referenced in Annex A.

*         A note section as part of the index to provide additional comments as needed

*         New prospective DTs added

o   L (IANA Function Separation Mechanism),

o   M (Escalation mechanisms beyond CSC) and

o   N (Periodic Review of IANA Functions).

*         An updated description for .INT DT to match description in draft transition proposal.

*         An 'expression of interest field', currently only in the Authorization Function DT-D
(as other expression of interests come in, we'll create the same for other DTs).



Where a priority is set as final, that is the priority we have agreed. Where it is provisional, that is indicative pending further detail on the DT emerging.



I look forward to reviewing this with you on the tomorrow.



Thanks,



Jonathan






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150309/4e3f093d/attachment-0001.html>