[Ssr2-review] Direction for Recommendation 1

Mon May 25 15:39:44 UTC 2020

I would like to go with CHOICE 3.

Naveed -

On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 7:36 PM Russ Housley <housley at vigilsec.com> wrote:
>
> Two people on the call spoke for CHOICE 3.  Now, KC has spoken for CHOICE 2.  I would like to hear from others too.
>
> Russ
>
>
> > On May 24, 2020, at 2:59 PM, k claffy <kc at caida.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I have always had, and made clear, a different opinion on this
> > issue.  I believe we need to do Option 1, but we do not have
> > the resources.  So we should probably have a recommendation
> > that makes it clear that given the state of documentation, it
> > was not possible for an independent review committee to do a
> > reasonable job at the required task of assessing all previous
> > implementations and their effectivness, beyond knowing that
> > there were gaps, for the reasons we highlight at the top of
> > Appendix D.  so we recommend this review task be outsourced to
> > paid professionals, who should take appendix D and review the
> > gaps that we discovered, and then make these recommendations SMART.
> >
> > I suspect we will also need to recommend this outsourcing
> > for our own recommendations, because I believe we cannot
> > even make those SMART in limited volunteer review time.
> >
> > I will note that ATRT3's original plan to perform this required
> > reivew of ATRT2's implementation was just to accept ICANN's own
> > self-assessment, due to the 12-month time window.  Several of
> > us on the team objected to this approach, and prevailed, but
> > we had the same trouble that SSR2 did with evaluating previous
> > implementations.  I will also note that this is why ICANN now
> > has implementation shepherds and the new Operating Standards,
> > so they are quite aware of the problem.  Alas, CCT's
> > implementation shepherds have not had much to shepherd..
> >
> > That said, I am in favor of dropping as many recommendations
> > as we can justify dropping from both SSR1 and 2.
> > Sorry I haven't gotten a chance to talk to Eric yet about the
> > ones we volunteered to cover. I hope this week.
> >
> > k
> >
> >
> >> CHOICE 1) Bring the table from Appendix D forward into Recommendation 1 and make each row SMART.  (A lot of work).
> >
> > this issue; I think we should not have
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:23:30AM -0400, Russ Housley wrote:
> >  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
> >>
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  Ssr2-review mailing list
> >  Ssr2-review at icann.org
> >  https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ssr2-review mailing list
> Ssr2-review at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.