[RSS GWG] December 16th meeting topics

[Ted Hardie]

Hi Brad,

Thanks for sharing this information with the group.

best regards,

Ted

On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 3:39 PM Verd, Brad <bverd at verisign.com> wrote:

> Ted,
>
>
>
> Just to give you heads up so you have some time to think about the RSOs
> response prior to the meeting this evening.   I shared the three options
> you described below with the RSOs to get their feedback.  The sentiment is
> unanimous and they believe option 2 is in alignment with what the contents
> set forth in the success criteria as well as the quickest path forward
> right now.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brad
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *RSSGWG <rssgwg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Ted Hardie via
> RSSGWG <rssgwg at icann.org>
> *Reply-To: *Ted Hardie <ted.ietf at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 9:23 AM
> *To: *"rssgwg at icann.org" <rssgwg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] [RSS GWG] December 16th meeting topics
>
>
>
> *Caution:* This email originated from outside the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
>
>
> As you will recall, we started the discussion last week of how best to
> make progress now that we have received and accepted RSSAC 058.  From my
> perspective, we have the following decisions to make:
>
>
>
> * Are we going to request substantive adjustments to our membership makeup
> and working methods?
>
>
>
> * Given the above, what is a realistic timeline for the work plan we can
> share with the ICANN board and community?
>
>
>
> * Given the updated timeline and the original expectation of a two-year
> commitment, are there additional folks who would expect to request that
> others be appointed to take on phase two of the work?
>
>
>
> As you can see from the above, all of this pretty much gates on what, if
> any, adjustments we request to our membership and working methods.
>
> In our previous discussion, I heard two basic approaches, and I believe
> there is a third.
>
>
>
> The first approach would be to make no changes to the current membership
> model or working methods.  The second would be to bring in all the RSOs as
> members of the group and to adjust the working methods to require full
> consensus.  The third would be to adjust the methods of the working group
> to permit observers, with the goal of allowing the RSOs or other
> stakeholder groups to observe the proceedings in real time and to give
> early feedback via their representatives.
>
>
>
> At the meeting tomorrow, I plan to ask the members of the group to reflect
> on these choices (or to provide other options), so we can see if we can
> come to a consensus on at least the first question.
>
>
>
> best regards,
>
>
>
> Ted Hardie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssgwg/attachments/20211216/1cf2a4c3/attachment.html>