[Internal-cg] Combined proposal assessment

[Russ Housley]

Manal:

I have been thinking about this part of your assessment:

> ·         Dependency on CCWG proposal: “The CWG-Stewardship proposal is significantly dependent and expressly conditioned on the implementation of ICANN-level accountability mechanisms by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability)”.  Worth noting that it was agreed by the ICG at its meeting in Buenos Aires that once CCWG Workstream1 output issent to SOs/ACs for approval, the ICG will seek confirmation from the CWG that the CCWG's work meets its requirements.  Hence final transition proposal is pending CWG confirmation that CCWG final proposal meets its requirements. 

I do not think that the ICG should ask CWG-Stewardship whether the CCWG-Accountability result meets its requirements.  Instead, it would be much more powerful for the chartering SOs and ACs to state that they have reached consensus  on the CCWG-Accountability result and that they have determined that the CCWG-Accountability result completely meets the requirements set forth in the CWG-Stewardship proposal.  Getting this confirmation from the chartering SOs and ACs seems a more powerful demonstration of consensus for the combined proposal.

Russ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/attachments/20150715/63a173bc/attachment.html>