[council] SSAD ODP liaison report - August 2021

Fri Aug 20 18:28:27 UTC 2021

Thanks, Philippe, and thanks Janis for the report.

May I please ask for some clarification on behalf of the BC re this part of 14:3: “In particular, those potential SSAD requestors who are not part of the ICANN community must have the opportunity to comment and interact with the IRT. This input should help inform the IRT deliberations on this topic”.

Do we have any practical suggestions about how non-community members could interact with the IRT? We all know how much time and effort any IRT demands of its members - and of course IRTs are populated by all stakeholders. I’d have thought that by default, anyone who knows that there is such a thing, and how to engage with it, would be within the ICANN community. Who are they aiming to attract, and – concretely - how? Is the IRT really the best place for non-community participation?

Best to both,

Marie

From: council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of philippe.fouquart--- via council
Sent: Wednesday, 18 August 2021 10:24
To: council at gnso.icann.org
Cc: Janis Karklins <karklinsj at gmail.com>; gnso-secs at icann.org
Subject: Re: [council] SSAD ODP liaison report - August 2021

Dear Councilors,

A reminder to provide any input you may have on this report and the comment on EPDP Ph2 recommendation 14.3.  Please do so by the end of the week.

If you would like this on an AOB agenda item on Thursday, please let the list know.

Thanks.

All the best,
Philippe

From: FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET
Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 12:25 PM
To: 'council at gnso.icann.org' <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
Cc: 'Janis Karklins' <karklinsj at gmail.com<mailto:karklinsj at gmail.com>>; gnso-secs at icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>; 'Caitlin Tubergen' <caitlin.tubergen at icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen at icann.org>>; 'Yuko Green' <yuko.green at icann.org<mailto:yuko.green at icann.org>>
Subject: SSAD ODP liaison report - August 2021

Dear Councilors,

Please find the report from our liaison to the SSAD ODP. Thanks for this, Janis.

In particular note the question raised about recommendation 14.3 and transparency around the SSAD funding and financials aspects, and the associated response. Comments and feedback are obviously welcome.

Regards,
Philippe

From: Janis Karklins [mailto:karklinsj at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 7:24 AM
To: FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET <philippe.fouquart at orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart at orange.com>>
Cc: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen at icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen at icann.org>>; Yuko Green <yuko.green at icann.org<mailto:yuko.green at icann.org>>
Subject:

Dear Philippe,

Pls see below my next report to the GNSO Council which I submit in my role as the liaison to the SSAD ODP Team.

Thank you for circulating it to the Councilors.

Best regards

JK

Dear Councilors:

I am including a short summary of my latest monthly meeting with ICANN org’s SSAD ODP team from 3 August below.

I informed the SSAD ODP team about my short presentation during the recent GNSO Council meeting on 22 July. I explained that I provided my responses to ICANN org’s assumptions regarding the EPDP Phase 2 recommendations in advance of the meeting and asked the Council if anyone had questions or concerns. Having heard no concerns, I thanked the Council for its time and committed to provide updates regarding future meetings with the SSAD ODP Team and future questions regarding ICANN org’s assumptions.

The SSAD ODP team informed me that multiple surveys are out for response. Both the survey to Contracted Parties and the survey to the wider ICANN community<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ssadodpcommunity> have an updated deadline of mid-August due to low participation. A separate survey to the GAC<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/odp-ssad/2021-July/000014.html> has a response deadline on 17 September. Because the team is waiting for survey responses during the month of August, the next community webinar date will likely occur in September.

Lastly, the SSAD ODP Team identified another question and assumption they wished to discuss with me regarding recommendation 14. The assumption and my response is annexed to this message for your information. The SSAD ODP Team plans, pending no objection from the GNSO Council, to proceed with its work on the basis of this assumption (and the previously articulated assumptions) and my response thereto. The verified assumptions will be used by the ODP Team as it works on an assessment to inform the Board’s review of the EPDP Phase 2 policy recommendations.

I plan to meet with the SSAD ODP team again in early September and will provide another update at that time.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best regards

JK

Question/Assumption

Liaison's comment

Recommendation 14.3 states: “The prospective users of the SSAD, as determined based on the implementation of the accreditation process and Identity Providers to be used, should be consulted on setting usage fees for the SSAD. In particular, those potential SSAD requestors who are not part of the ICANN community must have the opportunity to comment and interact with the IRT. This input should help inform the IRT deliberations on this topic.” Recommendation 14.4 further notes that the SSAD should be a self-sustaining system.

Assumption: ICANN org assumes the high-level financial details related to a self-sustaining SSAD will be shared with the ICANN community for the purposes of transparency, and the overall cost of running the system will be determined by ICANN org to ensure self-sustainability.

Assumption is correct.

The fees level may need to be reviewed over time based on acquired experience running the SSAD. Such a review should be evidence based and subject of transparent process of consultations with ICANN stakeholders and SSAD users outside ICANN community.

For sake of accuracy: 14.4 states: “The SSAD SHOULD NOT be considered a profit-generating platform for ICANN or the contracted parties.” Notion of self-sustainability does not exclude possibility of profit generation which goes against the adopted policy.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20210820/4238fb7e/attachment-0001.html>