Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG - Discussion document for Singapore (PDF Version)

[Seun Ojedeji]

sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 3 Feb 2015 23:30, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>.
>
> While we do have a specific NCSG-IANA list, it is coming time to reach
beyond that list to the membership.
>
Oh do we? Can I have the subscription reference URL (not sure I am on that
one)

>
>
> The models are:
>
> External Contract Co which is empowered to periodically hold an RFP for
the IANA function
> External Trust which hold a the contract in trust and can, on
instructions from a multistakeholder group decide to remove the function.
>
I am yet to get the gist around a trust holding contract, perhaps you care
to clarify the following questions:
- Who awards a contract in the trust settings?
- Will the trust be a legal entity?
- How is this trust different from contract co in terms of being resource
independent/subject to capture et all?
- Who holds the trust in this scenario?

> IANA Internal with a nuclear option (sometime expressed as exploding
bolts) if something goes serious wrong
>
Perhaps should add that this hopes to gain it's strength/basis from the
bylaw review

> Internal trust, similar to external trust except that ICANN itself holds
the trust.
>
Not sure contracts is part of this one and for this RFPs will be triggered
based.

Regards
>
>
> avri
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:
> [CWG-Stewardship] CWG - Discussion document for Singapore (PDF Version)
> Date:
> Tue, 3 Feb 2015 21:18:24 -0000
> From:
> Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
> Reply-To:
> jrobinson at afilias.info
> Organization:
> Afilias
> To:
> cwg-stewardship at icann.org
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> Please see attached for the final version of the CWG Discussion Document
for Singapore. Thank-you to all who contributed to the preparation and
refinement of the document.
>
>
>
> We believe that we now have an excellent document, prepared in good
faith, that attempts to capture and summarise the considerable progress
made by this group to date. Moreover, we hope that this, together with our
other communication and interaction work, will provide the broader
community with a solid base to understand the work of the CWG to-date and
therefore, to effectively engage with us as we move ahead towards a
proposal.
>
>
>
> We look forward to working with you over the next week or so on this
important phase of our work and for those who are travelling to Singapore,
safe travels and see you there.
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
>
> Jonathan & Lise
>
> Co-chairs
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20150204/7d282b4a/attachment.htm>