[CWG-Stewardship] Notes, Recordings, Transcript CWG IANA Meeting #78 - 31 March 2016

Thu Mar 31 18:14:46 UTC 2016

Dear all, 

The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CWG IANA Meeting #78 on 31 March will be available
here: https://community.icann.org/x/6wWAAw

A copy of the notes and action items may be found below.

Kind regards,

Brenda

Action Items

*	Action item 1#: Lise to communicate agreement to go with supermajority vote for question 1,
noting that reference 
should be changed to GNSO Council and ccNSO Council.
*	Action item #2: Lise to communicate agreement to go with 30 days for question 2.
*	Action item #3: Lise to confirm as soon as possible whether additional CWG-Stewardship call
is scheduled for next week.
*	Action item #4: CWG-Stewardship to provide input on the proposed financial objectives for
PTI as circulated to the mailing list within 48 hours. 
*	Action item #5: Confirm on list no objections to proposed recommendation to ensure that PTI
multi-year guaranteed funding 
is covered in the Bylaws within 48 hours. 
*	Action item #6: CWG-Stewardship to provide feedback on the suggestion to have Jonathan and
Lise to serve as interim 
PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence within 48
hours.
*	Action item #7: Confirm agreement with recommendation that all three IANA functions will be
moved to PTI as it was 
originally foreseen in the ICG/CWG-Stewardship Proposal. 

Notes

1. Opening Remarks 

*        Quite a few developments since Marrakesh - a lot of work has gone into implementation
related activities including Bylaw drafting. 

*        DT-O has been meeting as well to discuss items related to the budget. 

*        Further meetings have taken place with the other operational communities concerning IPR. 

*        Implementation Oversight Task Force was created and kicked off after ICANN Meeting
Marrakesh - consists of 
ICANN Implementation Team, Chairs of CWG-Stewardship, DT Leads, Chair of ICG and representatives 
of other operational communities. TF to serve as a sounding board for ICANN implementation staff -
any decisions 
are brought back to the CWG-Stewardship for review. TF has two meetings a week scheduled, to be 
used if needed. All of the meetings are recorded and transcripts will now be provided as well.
Mailing list archives 
are publicly available. All the materials and recordings are available at
<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation> https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation.
Those interested to join the TF as an observer, please contact  <mailto:yuko.green at icann.org>
yuko.green at icann.org.

2. Implementation Planning  -  Staff update (Trang Nguyen) - see
<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58721771/CWG%20Update%2031MAR16.pdf?version=1&modi
ficationDate=1459441722785&api=v2> slide deck presented.

*        Interim PTI Board: will the ICANN Board appoint all 5 people and then these will be
replaced? No, ICANN Board 
would appoint ICANN PTI Board members, these would not be considered interim. Further consideration
will need 
to be given to how to select the interim independent Board members (see also PTI Board & Structure
item)

*        Bylaws drafting - Legal advisors where pleased with co-operation between all the lawyers.
Are progressing in a timely 
fashion. Expect to be ready to send something for review to CCWG-Accountability and CWG-Stewardship
by 1 April. 
See questions circulated by Lise. 

*        Question 1 - recommendation to go with supermajority vote. Reference should be to ccNSO
Council and GNSO 
Council (not ccNSO and GNSO). Do both Councils have supermajority defined? GNSO Council
Supermajority is 
defined in the ICANN Bylaws. What is the rationale for recommending a supermajority vote? Items are
intended to 
have a high approval treshold. Agreement to follow the recommendation for a supermajority vote.

Action item 1#: Lise to communicate agreement to go with supermajority vote for question 1, noting
that reference should 
be changed to GNSO Council and ccNSO Council.

*        Question 19 - recommendation to go with 30 days. Agreement to go with 30 days.

Action item #2: Lise to communicate agreement to go with 30 days for question 2.

*        How should CWG-Stewardship go about reviewing the Bylaws? Bylaws are expected to be
published for public 
comment by 20 April so any input from the CWG-Stewardship would need to be received before that
time. Consider 
scheduling an additional CWG-Stewardship meeting for next week. 

Action item #3: Lise to confirm as soon as possible whether additional CWG-Stewardship call is
scheduled for next week.

*        Budget process (Chuck Gomes) - see financial objectives for PTI as developed by DT O and
circulated to the mailing 
list. Consider what needs to appear in the Bylaws, for example in relation to reserve. If not in
Bylaws, maybe in the 
contract? DT O is of the view that there should be a statement in the Bylaws that there should be
multi-year guaranteed 
funding for PTI. DT O communicated this to Becky Burr who was involved in the Bylaw drafting, noting
that the CWG-Stewardship had not agreed to it yet. Discussed in previous call that Sidley would
provide a light touch approach, not 
committing to any kind of specific resolution, allowing for further deliberations to take place.
General principle should 
be embodied in the Bylaws, the solution should be decided and embodied elsewhere. Support for this
approach by those 
on the call, provide some additional time to those not on the call to express support / objection.

*        CWG-Stewardship to consider whether to submit comments on the FY17 Budget. DT-O to expected
to make a 
recommendation to the CWG-Stewardship following tommorow's DT-O meeting. Deadline for comments is 30
April. 

Action item #4: CWG-Stewardship to provide input on the proposed financial objectives for PTI as
circulated to the mailing list 
within 48 hours. 

Action item #5: Confirm on list no objections to proposed recommendation to ensure that PTI
multi-year guaranteed funding 
is covered in the Bylaws within 48 hours. 

*        CSC Charter - staff working with Donna (GNSO), Katrina (ccNSO) and relevant staff to work
through some of the 
issues in relation to the CSC. For example, appointment / re-appointment procedures in GNSO and
ccNSO. Status 
update will be provided to CWG-Stewardship team following those discussions. Ensure that both
communities 
understand what the requirements are for the creation of CSC and relevant procedures are in place,
for example 
for the approval of the CSC membership. Working out geographic diversity and skills requirements. 

*        PTI Board & Structure: overview of discussions by IOTF - see slides presented during call.
Suggestion to have 
Jonathan and Lise to serve as interim PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around
conflict 
and independence until the NomCom would be able to make the selection as originally foreseen as part
of their 
normal selection cycle.

Action item #6: CWG-Stewardship to provide feedback on the suggestion to have Jonathan and Lise to
serve as interim 
PTI independent directors assuming there are no issues around conflict and independence within 48
hours.

*        All three IANA functions will be moved to PTI. This is considered to be in line with the
CWG-Stewardship proposal. 

*        ICANN legal is preparing memo in relation to difficulties of transferring staff to PTI. To
be discussed further. 

Action item #7: Confirm agreement with recommendation that all three IANA functions will be moved to
PTI as it was 
originally foreseen in the ICG/CWG-Stewardship Proposal. 

3. IANA IPR 

*        See
<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/58721771/ProposedPrincipalTermsofIANA_20160308.pdf
?version=1&modificationDate=1459444884447&api=v2> document shared during meeting and overview
provided by Greg. Principle terms developed by all three 
communities. Now being reviewed by legal counsel of other communities. Once feedback comes back,
these will 
be reviewed by Sidley, followed by further discussion and possible revision by the whole group.
Following finalization 
of principles terms, group would move on to creating the actual documents required.

*        Consider including an introductory paragraph regarding history of IETF Trust.

*        More detailed discussion to take place in CWG-Stewardship at a later stage.

4. AOB

*        Next meeting on 14 April at 16:00 UTC. (note that a special meeting may be scheduled next
week to review 
and discuss the draft Bylaws).

 5. Closing Remarks

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160331/35001f83/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160331/35001f83/image003-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 378 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160331/35001f83/image004-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160331/35001f83/smime-0001.p7s>