[Ssr2-review] Subteam Status

[Russ Housley]

The people on the call today were supportive of CHOICE 3 (see below).  If you have a different opinion, please speak up now.

Russ

> On May 13, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Russ Housley <housley at vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
> SUBTEAM 1
> 
> The comments against recommendation 1 fall into two categories:
> 
> 1) Strong support for finishing SSR1 recommendation implementation from BC, IPC, M3AAWG, NCSG, RrSG, and RySG.
> 
> 2) Request for more detail on what is needed to "fully implement" each SSR1 recommendation from SSAC, ICANN Board, ICANN Org, and GAC.
> 
> In addition, the following comment assigned to Subteam 1 is not really about Recommendation 1.  I think we need to recategorize it.
> 
>   (SSAC)(3.1.2) The SSAC has some concerns about the viability of
>   implementation of such a significant list of actions. Specifically,
>   the SSAC is concerned about the extent, cost, sequence, and timeframe
>   of the necessary actions required to implement all of these
>   recommendations. Are there other measures that the SSR2 RT may wish
>   to propose that would give the 135 proposed recommendations a
>   significant prospect of avoiding the same incomplete fate as the
>   27 outstanding SSR1 recommendations by the time of the next SSR review?
> 
> This is really encouraging us to have fewer recommendations.  The GAG comments also encourage fewer recommendations.
> 
> I think the whole review team needs to weigh in on the choices for going forward.
> 
> CHOICE 1) Bring the table from Appendix D forward into Recommendation 1 and make each row SMART.  (A lot of work).
> 
> CHOICE 2) Drop Recommendation 1 and strengthen Suggestion 2 to say that incomplete implementation will be caught earlier in the process by the ICANN community, but also encourage the completion of the SSR1 recommendation implementation.
> 
> CHOICE 3) Keep Recommendation 1 as is, and strengthen Suggestion 2.
> 
> We will discuss the way forward on the next SSR2 RT Plenary call.
> 
> Russ
> 
> 
>> On May 11, 2020, at 14:02, Russ Housley <housley at vigilsec.com> wrote:
>> 
>> We are not having a plenary call this week so that subteams can continue their work.
>> 
>> I ask that the Rapporteur for each subteam to send a short status to the whole team by close of business on Wednesday.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Russ
>> 
>> - - - - - - - -
>> 
>> Subteam No. / Rapporteur
>> 
>> 1	Russ
>> 2	Boban
>> 3	Kerry-Ann
>> 4	Noorul
>> 5	Laurin
>> 6	Norm
>> 7	Boban
>> 8	Boban
>> 9	Boban
>> 10	Denise
>> 11	Denise
>> 12	Denise
>> 13	Denise
>> 14	Denise
>> 15	Laurin
>> 16	Laurin
>> 17	Laurin
>> 18	Laurin
>> 19	kc
>> 20	Eric
>> 21	Eric
>> 22	kc
>> 23	Zarko
>> 24	kc
>> 25	kc
>> 26	Zarko
>> 27	Alain
>> 28	Naveed
>> 29	Kerry-Ann
>> 30	Eric
>> 31	Zarko
>