Content Comparison

Transcript

Recording

The Adobe Connect recording is available here:  https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p9qmookqas3/

The audio recording is available here: http://audio.icann.org/stewardship-transition/iana-dto-20jul16-en.mp3

Notes

Slide 1

• The second bullet point's:  ">" means arrows/chevrons, not "larger than."

How can we align PTI and ICANN Board on PTI budget?

• PTI & ICANN Board should engage prior to community engagement
• PTI OP&B should be reviewd by PTI Board and ICANN BFC at the same time for parallel visibility and alignment?

Community engagement - What should be included?

• Public comment should be mandatory (Chuck, Cheryl, Olivier)
• Community engagement period coincides with ICANN meeting. It fits well if face-to-face meeting is necessary (Xavier, Olivier)
• May require to have a special involvement from CSC and direct customers within the community engagement period (Chuck)
• Utilize the usual model of financial planning in terms of community engagement at the beginning/prior to public comment 

Action Item: Develop the process that accounts for public comment (ICANN)

Do we need to have both PTI and ICANN board approval right after “respond to community feedback and update draft” step? ICANN's budget public comment won't happen until
towards the end of Q3 and may introduce complication.

• Consider Board approval to occur after the ICANN's budget public comment? Replace "approval" with "receive" on the current timeline?

CWG proposal called for community approval whereas CCWG proposal called for veto power by community. Do we need a formal community "approval"?

• With community veto power, no need for a formal community apprval (Chuck, Cheryl, Mary)

Missing items from the timeline (Slide 2)

• Engagement with CSC (performance matter) and RZERC (technical or architectural matter)  if necessary at the end of fiscal year (Chuck)
• Seek input from CSC & RZERC as an on-going bases as well as at the onset of the process (Xavier & Elise)
• Make it clear when and how the engagement and elaboration with other groups occurs

Next Step

• ICANN to develop a detailed timeline and process based on today's conversation
• DT-O members attended today's call support the direction and believes this will meet the CWG recommendation. DT-O is available for consultation if needed.
• Provide CWG the status update

Chat Transcript

Brenda Brewer: (7/20/2016 13:36) Good day all and welcome to DT-O Meeting #17 on 20 July @ 19:00 UTC!

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (13:57) Hi team :-)

  Chuck Gomes: (14:10) Thanks Yuko

  Yuko Green: (14:13) @Chuck, you are welcome!

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:13) Yes that makes sense re engagement Planning  Xavier

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:22) Early engagement always makes  sense to me OCL

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:36) Very impoportant re the premis  points  Chuck!

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:36) yes  this is ground zero  so eceptional

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond: (14:40) In the spirit of transparency there needs to be a public comment

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:42) +1 OCL  it lines up with the 'usual'  ICANN Public Meeting schedule 

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:45) I am going along with your initial thinking poits   here Chuck 

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:46) Yes the model is robust  and can be made work

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:47) I would hope not!

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:49) +1 Chuck

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:50) Yes Xavier taylorng  would be required

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (14:52) Tailoring *sigh*  still typing in the dark here in AU

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:00) Yes  and that makes sense to me

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond: (15:02) +1 it makes sense

  Mary Uduma: (15:05) +1 @ chuck

  Mary Uduma: (15:11) yeep

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:16) indeed Chuck

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr  (CLO): (15:21) Bye