[Ssr2-coordination] [Ext] Re: SSR2 coordination follow-up
jennifer.bryce at icann.org
Mon Oct 16 16:00:26 UTC 2017
Hi Denise & Eric,
To help address the concern expressed below that the decisions reached page of the wiki doesn’t accurately reflect the work of the Review Team, we would like to propose to add a disclaimer to the page to point people to the Fact Sheet and Work Plan to see the status of the Review. Some suggested text is below. Please advise if this disclaimer can be added to the page.
“This page is a tool for Review Team Members. It assembles decisions reached on conference calls/mailing-lists to help Review Team keep track of key conclusions. It does not – in any way - seek to capture the progress accomplished by the Review Team in advancing its work or work in progress. Please refer to the Fact Sheet<https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/Fact+Sheet> and/or Work Plan<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=64075835> for more information.”
Additionally, as we mentioned, we have reviewed the transcripts and email lists as part of an accuracy check of the decisions captured on the wiki pages. All decisions reached in emails, and subteam, plenary and leadership meetings have been captured in this Google document<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RuAb0s0oSdDA7_Ebog5xdxCYhaa_VvkVh1JysKUr7Zk/edit#gid=0>.
Per our new process, please review and approve the decisions reached. Once we have your approval these will be updated on the decisions reached page of the wiki.
From: Denise Michel <denisemichel at fb.com>
Date: Monday, September 25, 2017 at 11:53 PM
To: Jennifer Bryce <jennifer.bryce at icann.org>, ssr2-coordination <ssr2-coordination at icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Ssr2-coordination] SSR2 coordination follow-up
Thanks for your email. Addressing your first bullet on “Decisions Made”:
We appreciate your help in rectifying this. Unfortunately, I am not quite comfortable with the process.
The average person would assume the “Decisions Made[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_Decisions-2BMade&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=VuRMFw6YascG5ysc1jEHBZgGTtD6QSLrFmqdvMx5FM8&m=_DuWk_Jamjh44DhmYDqZ2gRuS3wD2jXN3QKbgGgY1xY&s=uWMjKwOZJmBl2VRh4QKzsVcnvZaC-bbXCBzP3ZHzbRA&e=>” category highlighted on the left side of the wiki homepage lists key decisions made by the Team. It doesn’t. This gives people a false sense of what the Team has done. This page is missing creation of subgroups, adoption of workplan, gap analysis, etc, etc. It also ignores the work in progress, and I’m concerned that it gives an incorrect sense of what the Team has been doing. Additionally, it’s organized by call dates which is problematic when decisions are made via email.
The same can be said for the “Decisions” section on the Subgroup SSR1 Implementation wiki page[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_Subgroup-2B-25231-2B-2D-2BSSR1-2BReview&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=VuRMFw6YascG5ysc1jEHBZgGTtD6QSLrFmqdvMx5FM8&m=_DuWk_Jamjh44DhmYDqZ2gRuS3wD2jXN3QKbgGgY1xY&s=68ZN_I9HhDil4JIfv7ww6x4Ij2nXu3vMSH2bLjCMyq4&e=>. Here again, important items (e.g. Subgroup work via emails/plenary calls, and gap analysis) are missing and, of course, the group was not disbanded, as stated. Decisions made outside the subgroup call are not reflected here, nor is all of the SSR1 review work and requests for information that is ongoing.
Please note that I did not look at the decisions of the other subgroups, which also may contain errors.
Personally, I find the other sections of the wiki, along with newsletter updates, to be more useful for people tracking the Team’s work, and would suggest this category be reconsidered altogether. While I agree with the process outlined by Eric, I wanted to first take a step back and consider what you’re trying to achieve and whether this section is the best way to do it.
I also would like to understand what staff’s plan is to fix the inaccuracies that are currently publicly posted? I would like this to be a priority (ie. take down the “Decisions” list or fix it ASAP).
Domain Name System Strategy & Management
denisemichel at fb.com<mailto:denisemichel at fb.com>
From: <ssr2-coordination-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Jennifer Bryce <jennifer.bryce at icann.org>
Date: Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:14 AM
To: "ssr2-coordination at icann.org" <ssr2-coordination at icann.org>
Subject: [Ssr2-coordination] SSR2 coordination follow-up
Dear Denise & Eric,
I hope you are both feeling better. As a follow-up to our call on Friday, here are the items we discussed. To help us best plan to support the Review Team’s work, please let us know the dates you expect to be able to address each of the items.
Actions for Co-Chairs
* Denise, can you confirm if you are comfortable with the revised process to capture decisions reached outlined in my 21 September email?
* Eric confirmed he is ok with the revised process.
* See my email here: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ssr2-coordination/2017-September/000470.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mm.icann.org_pipermail_ssr2-2Dcoordination_2017-2DSeptember_000470.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=MWVuq3jZIw5gwhGdDf-HWNL4CEWIsdUnt9gOgplCArM&m=UJCJZsXUr4CdcC65zEwsoHBdcWm_z4ZOu6WpgHojlEs&s=Et5nLrXAzhwpkzEPhxj5JazaxIjpNR_F25NCfZD60-8&e=>
* Can we move forward with the process for engaging a contractor?
* Alice circulated a revised gap analysis specifications document for your consideration on 21 September, which we hope addresses your concerns. The documents are attached again here.
* Please address the technical writer questions re-circulated via email on 17 August with the objective of defining the work statement - do you want to brainstorm this on a plenary call?
* See the email here: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ssr2-coordination/2017-July/000327.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mm.icann.org_pipermail_ssr2-2Dcoordination_2017-2DJuly_000327.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=MWVuq3jZIw5gwhGdDf-HWNL4CEWIsdUnt9gOgplCArM&m=UJCJZsXUr4CdcC65zEwsoHBdcWm_z4ZOu6WpgHojlEs&s=nj_ePtGM19XK9kv3XLuwq0R7patGGuD8o8LRv3zmpoU&e=>
* Would you like the 4 October presentation suggested by the Registries Stakeholder Group to go ahead or is the date too early? The presentation was suggested in response to the Abu Dhabi outreach note we sent on your behalf.
* Should we cancel the 10 October 06:00 plenary call due to the ICANN SSR subgroup meeting taking place that day in LA?
Actions for ICANN Org:
* Respond to SO/AC groups with outstanding ICANN60 outreach questions, per Eric’s input.
* Schedule time in Abu Dhabi with members of the Framework for Registry Operators to Respond to Security Threats drafting team
Finally, we have attached a draft agenda for the Abu Dhabi face-to-face meeting for your consideration. Please let us know your thoughts.
Thank you for your inputs,
Senior Reviews Coordinator
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: jennifer.bryce at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ssr2-coordination