[Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG Plenary Topic: Gap Analysis

[Greg Shatan]

All,

As mentioned in my prior email, we discussed seeking clarification from the
CCWG Plenary regarding the Annex 12 statement that the Jurisdiction work
should include "confirming and assessing the gap analysis." The statement
does not include any further identification of the gap analysis or its
results.

To the best of our knowledge, there is no analysis done in WS1 that was
called a "gap analysis" in so many words.  Our rough interpretation is that
this refers to the (implicit?) determination that there were no significant
gaps in the accountability proposals resulting from ICANN's current
jurisdictional framework.  However, clarifying (or correcting) this would
be helpful.  To bring this back to the CWG Plenary, I would propose the
following question:

*The scope of the Jurisdiction topic in Annex 12 includes "confirming and
assessing the gap analysis."  *
*1. Can the CCWG Plenary identify the "gap analysis" referred to?  *
*2. If there was no formal gap analysis, is it correct to assume that this
refers to a determination that there were no significant gaps in the WS1
accountability proposal resulting from ICANN's current jurisdictional
framework? *

Greg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20160920/1e0fbf14/attachment.html>