[Ssr2-review] for SSR2 team member review and edit

Matogoro Jabera jaberamatogoro at gmail.com
Wed Oct 2 03:48:16 UTC 2019


Dear Russ,

I support the phrasing as it was given in our comment. If budget is the
main constrain then the board could approve the recommendation BUT the
implementation could remain pending up to next budget when fund will be
made available.

We could also give a paragraph analysing the approved, pending and rejected
recommendations. It could happen that the approved recommendations favour a
certain group at ICANN ecosystem. So it is better also to give a small
highlights on these.


Regards,
Matogoro

On Wed, 2 Oct 2019, 01:11 Russ Housley, <housley at vigilsec.com> wrote:

> Denise and Matogoro:
>
> I have some concern with this one sentence:
>
> The correct response to budgetary concerns (based on past Board action)
> would have been for the Board to approve the recommendations and note that
> implementation would begin in the new fiscal year.
>
>
> I agree with the direction that this is going, but I think it would be
> better for the Board action to include the implementation of the
> recommendation in the proposed budget for the following fiscal year, and
> then have the community review process of the budget determine whether or
> not the necessary funds are allocated.
>
> Russ
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ssr2-review/attachments/20191002/8dc2e905/attachment.html>


More information about the Ssr2-review mailing list