<p>Thanks for this Steve... </p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jul 13, 2015 11:23 AM, "Steve DelBianco" <<a href="mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org">sdelbianco@netchoice.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:16px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<div>
<div>As promised on our 8-Jul call, I updated our section on Stress Tests to reflect our discussion:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div>Added both stress tests suggested by Chris Disspain involving California courts. See pages 25-26.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Slightly edited ST #12 regarding internal capture prevention.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Added 2 stress tests suggested by Post & Kehl in public comments. See pages 27-28</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Added a stress test on “rogue voting”. See page 29</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Added all 4 of the NTIA suggested stress tests. See pages 30 - 33 </div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
First attachment is the updated ST doc for discussion on our next call, in prep for our presentation in Paris on Friday afternoon. </div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
Second attachment is redline from ST section we published on 3-May for public comment.</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
Third attachment is the public comment notes document we discussed last week.</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
Still need to review the ICANN board/legal memo of 20-Jun (<a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150619/1831ae72/ImplementationandImpactTestingQuestionsforCCWG-0001.pdf" target="_blank">Link</a>). At our request, Adam Peake went
thru the memo and found many potential stress tests:</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">1. SO/AC Membership Model</font></div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Q1. ST NTIA-3: Barriers to entry for new participants?</span></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q3. ST NTIA-2: Address the potential risk of capture?</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q4. Might build conflict of interest considerations into ST NTIA-2. New </font><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">test considering member powers (once known) and mitigate for.</span></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q5. ST NTIA-1: Test preservation of the multistakeholder model if SO/AC </font><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">opt out.</span></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q6. See new test mentioned in Q4, consider ST NTIA-4: Unintended </font>consequences. Also Stickling's statement also says "How can the Working</div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Group on Accountability ensure that the creation of new organizations or </font>tools will not interfere with the security and stability of the DNS during</div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">and after the transition? Do new committees and structures create a </font>different set of accountability questions?" which could be the basis of a</div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">new stress test or stress tests: does the proposal interfere with security </font>and stability of the DNS test, and, a second test: does the proposal a</div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">create a different set of accountability questions.</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q9. Suggests need for a test on the affect of member rights/powers (first </font><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">identifying what those are). See Q4 above. If still relevant with the new</span></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">model being considered?</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q10. Q11, See Q9 and Q4.</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q12. ST NTIA-2 and also new tests suggested in Q9 and Q4.</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q14. ST NTIA-1</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q15. ST NTIA-1, consider adding concept of member dispute resolution to </font><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">the test, and recommend to create such a mechanism if found relevant</span></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q19. Proposed test, what if GAC advice is accepted by the board and </font><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">rejected by the community mechanism (test was mentioned some months ago)</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
</blockquote>
<div><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">2. Community Right to Cause Reconsideration of or Reject Board Approved </span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Budgets and Strategic/Operating Plans</span></div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Q1. - Q5. See Q6 section above re security and stability. Voting </span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">thresholds in the community mechanism (council) may provide the answer,</span></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">but if not new test.</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
</blockquote>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">3. Community Right to Reject Changes to "Standard" Bylaws and Approve </font><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Changes to "Fundamental" Bylaws</span></div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Q1. See Q9 in section 1. Suggestion for a new test.</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">5. Community Right to Remove Entire ICANN Board</font></div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Q1. Existing test on reputational risk?</span></div>
</blockquote>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">6. Independent Review Process Enhancements</font></div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Q1. New test on: potential ramifications of assigning "due process </font><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">rights?"</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<br>
</div>
<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<div>
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<div>
<div></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<div></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</span>
</div>
</blockquote></div>