<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hello all,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I agree that the whole point of the Co-Chairs e-mail is precisely avoid going into a more bureaucratic process. I support the expansion of the CWG’s role and would agree on the ALAC supporting the Co-Chairs e-mail.</div><div class=""><br class=""><div class="">
<div class="">Best regards,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">León</div>
</div>
<br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">El 16/11/2015, a las 6:10 p.m., Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <<a href="mailto:ocl@gih.com" class="">ocl@gih.com</a>> escribió:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class="">
Dear Seun,<br class="">
<br class="">
my understanding is that no part of the email from the co-Chairs of
the CWG Stewardship contains a proposal to "change the charter". If
such a suggestion was made, there would need to be a detailed list
of the changes to be made in the charter, with the previous text
given and the replacement text (or added text) crafted and clearly
shared. The amendments would then need to be examined by all SOs and
ACs and voted on.<br class="">
<br class="">
My understanding is that the co-Chairs wanted to avoid all of this
and just provide notice to SOs/ACs about an extension to the
initially defined mission. No vote needed if there is no objection
from any Chartering Organisation.<br class="">
<br class="">
Kindest regards,<br class="">
<br class="">
Olivier<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/11/2015 19:14, Seun Ojedeji
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:CAD_dc6iqtgTV--qGddJ_NhpvOfuVUiBgfDGXGr0KWUXuQJo=Fg@mail.gmail.com" type="cite" class=""><p dir="ltr" class="">Hello Alan,</p><p dir="ltr" class="">What we are basically doing by this request is
modifying the charter, that is exactly the process that is
happening right now[1] so I don't really think there will be any
other issue/challenge with referencing the update in the
charter. It is the charter that determines the scope of work of
the CWG and when there is an expansion (which is agreed to by
the Chartering organisation) the charter should reflect such.</p><p dir="ltr" class="">While I support the expansion of CWG scope to cover
the intent of the request, I believe it should be reflected in
the charter. This will not require more process than we are
already going through right now. </p><p dir="ltr" class="">That said since Co-Chairs have already sent out the
message in this manner(which is cool), the CWG should reference
this document (with formal approval of Chartering organisations
in the charter). It's a minor process/documentation that we
should not ignore and let go on.</p><p dir="ltr" class="">Regards<br class="">
1. In the event it is decided that the charter needs to be
modified to address the omission or unreasonable <br class="">
impact, the co-chairs may propose to modify the charter. A
modification shall only be effective after <br class="">
adoption of the adjusted charter by the chartering organizations
in accordance with their own rules and <br class="">
procedures.</p><p dir="ltr" class="">Sent from my Asus Zenfone2<br class="">
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 16 Nov 2015 21:06, "Alan Greenberg"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" class="">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution" class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="">
Seun, I believe that this lightweight process is instead of
updating the
charter, which would require new drafting and then formal
action on
behalf of all of the chartering bodies to approve the
revision. If the
chartering bodies all agree to this method, we have
effectively changed
the mandate of the CWG without having to go through the
formalities -
quicker and easier.<br class="">
<br class="">
These messages (asking for and getting permission from the
chartering
bodies) will form part of the overall documentation for the
CWG and
should be sufficient.<br class="">
<br class="">
Alan<br class="">
<br class="">
At 16/11/2015 11:55 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hello,<br class="">
<br class="">
I believe it's in order and I recommend that while ALAC
supports this, we
should recommend that the CWG charter be updated
accordingly or at least
the communiqué be formerly referenced in the charter.<br class="">
<br class="">
Regards<br class="">
Sent from my Asus Zenfone2<br class="">
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.<br class="">
On 16 Nov 2015 16:47, "Alan Greenberg"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" target="_blank" class="">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>
> wrote:<br class="">
<dl class="">
<dd class="">Please see following message. <br class="">
<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">I believe this makes sense. If anyone has concerns
with this, please
let us know. Based on any negative comments, I will
initiate a Consensus
Call or formal vote next Monday, 23 November. The
Consensus Call or vote
will be for ALAC Members only, but of course, the
discussion is open to
anyone on this list.<br class="">
<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">Alan<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<dd class="">To: ALAC, CCNSO, GAC, GNSO, SSAC<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">Cc: CWG-Stewardship, ICG, CRISP, IANAPLAN,
CCWG-Accountability, ICANN
Implementation & ICANN Policy Staff. <br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">Dear Chartering Organizations of the CWG IANA
Stewardship, <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""> <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">Subject: CWG-Stewardship role in implementation<br class="">
<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">At ICANN54 in Dublin, the IANA Stewardship
Coordination Group (ICG)
confirmed designation of the operational
communities to be responsible
for direct implementation oversight of their
proposals. <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""> <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">The CWG-Stewardship also met during the course
of ICANN54 and
discussed this role and we continued this
discussion in a subsequent
meeting on Thursday 5 November 2015. An oversight
role is not
specifically detailed in our Charter, but it is
the CWG-Stewardship’s
view that our role in implementation is to ensure
that the implementation
is consistent with the CWG-Stewardship Final
Proposal and furthermore, to
provide input on the implementation work when
required by staff working
on the implementation or, if and when necessary,
to bring the
implementation work back in line with the intent
of the Final Proposal.
<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""> <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">In our view, the most logical option is to have
the CWG-Stewardship
working group continue in its current form and
with the responsibility to
monitor the implementation and provide input where
needed. Of course,
this responsibility would include regular updates
to the Chartering
Organizations via the appointed members as well as
consultations with the
Chartering Organizations should issues be
identified that are deemed
without this specific remit. <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""> <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">We note here for your information, that while
the CWG-Stewardship
Final Proposal was submitted in June 2015, the
CWG-Stewardship has
remained active and therefore available when
needed. This has included
being available to answer questions from the ICG,
or to monitor the
CCWG-Accountability dependencies and to coordinate
with the other
operational communities on shared issues such as
IANA intellectual
property rights. <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""> <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">As the CWG-Stewardship Charter does not
specifically address
implementation, we would like to ensure that the
CWG-Stewardship’s
proposed approach in relation to implementation is
not inconsistent with
the intent of the Chartering Organizations
concerning the scope and role
of the CWG-Stewardship. We therefore propose to
proceed to oversee the
implementation work as described above unless
there are objections from
one or more Chartering Organizations. <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""> <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">We would like to emphasize that the
CWG-Stewardship does not intend
to change its working methods in light of this
ongoing role. The group
will remain open to anyone who wishes to join, and
we will welcome
informed individuals with relevant implementation
and operational
experience to join the CWG-Stewardship in this
next phase. <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""> <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">Thank you for your consideration of this matter
and for your ongoing
support of our work. Please let us know of any
concerns by no later than
30 November 2015. <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""> <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">Jonathan Robinson & Lise Fuhr <br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">CWG-Stewardship co-Chairs</dd>
</blockquote>
</dd>
</dl>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<dd class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">ALAC mailing list<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class=""><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank" class="">
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac" target="_blank" class="">
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a><br class="">
<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">At-Large Online:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org/" target="_blank" class="">http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a>
<br class="">
</dd>
<dd class="">ALAC Working Wiki:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28ALAC%29" target="_blank" class="">
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</a>
<br class="">
</dd>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br class="">
<pre wrap="" class="">_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org">ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac">https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a>
At-Large Online: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org/">http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a>
ALAC Working Wiki: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)">https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">ALAC mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" class="">ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br class="">https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac<br class=""><br class="">At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org<br class="">ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>