FYI - Public Comment on AoC and Organizational Reviews
Dear all, For your information --- A session on AoC and Organizational Reviews: Supporting ICANN Accountability<http://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-aoc-org-reviews> took place this morning at ICANN53. This session covered Reviews defined by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) and Organizational Reviews, mandated by ICANN's Bylaws. Topics included: proposed schedule for upcoming reviews, proposed process and operational improvements to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of reviews, implementation status of recommendations from the Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2), the Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review (SSR) and the "WHOIS Policy" Review (WHOIS). Please note that community feedback is currently being sought on a proposed schedule and process, including operational improvements, for Reviews mandated by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC Reviews) and the ICANN Bylaws (Organizational Reviews). The request for the community is based on both appreciating the community's workload and the timing of several Reviews in FY2016. The public comment on Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-2015-...> will close on 2 July. Comments can be submitted to comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15@icann.org If you have any questions about this public comment proceeding, please contact Larisa Gurnick at l<mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>arisa.gurnick@icann.org<mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>.
Dear Colleagues, A quick way to contribute to this call for comment would be to to submit a CCWG comment saying : stall the AoC reviews until approval of the new Bylaws which will be related to these reviews. Same for organizational reviews to avoid potential conflicting priorities with the SO/AC accountability discussion. Icann could, as a consequence, allocate more resources to supporting our work ;-) I am conscious this is very last minute, and don't want to rrush any decision. Unless there is clear support or other views getting traction within our group, we will most certainly abstain. best Mathieu Le 24/06/2015 19:02, Alice Jansen a écrit :
Dear all,
For your information ---
A session on AoC and Organizational Reviews: Supporting ICANN Accountability <http://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-aoc-org-reviews> took place this morning at ICANN53. This session covered Reviews defined by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) and Organizational Reviews, mandated by ICANN's Bylaws. Topics included: proposed schedule for upcoming reviews, proposed process and operational improvements to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of reviews, implementation status of recommendations from the Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2), the Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review (SSR) and the "WHOIS Policy" Review (WHOIS).
Please note that community feedback is currently being sought on a proposed schedule and process, including operational improvements, for Reviews mandated by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC Reviews) and the ICANN Bylaws (Organizational Reviews). The request for the community is based on both appreciating the community's workload and the timing of several Reviews in FY2016. The public comment on Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-2015-...> will close on 2 July. Comments can be submitted to comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15@icann.org
If you have any questions about this public comment proceeding, please contact Larisa Gurnick at l <mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>arisa.gurnick@icann.org <mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>.
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
Hi, I do not believe that stalling all, or perhaps any, of the reviews is a good idea. Most important to the work of this group, ATRT3 is scheduled for next year, though not even mentioned in the schedule. I believe it is critical that this review happen. Not only do we need to find out what is happening with the ATRT2 recommendations, and the still pending ATRT1 recommendations, we need to set a baseline for the transition. A cursory glance at the status of ATRT2 recommended changes *<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt2-recommendation-implementat...> * indicates that there is not only a necessity to make sure that the Staff has correctly interpreted the recommendations, but to ensure that the changes are being made. Additionally I think that since the AOC reviews are based on an agreement, any decsion for postponing any of them will need to be done with NTIA buy in. I do not beleive we should unilaterally postpone, as that might be seen as abrogating the existing agreement on accountability. How then should we be beleived on future commitments? As for the Bylaws based reviews, as they are driven by the Board, I suppose the Board has the ability to just abrogate the bylaws if it decides they need to be. As this is something we seem to frown upon in this accountability work, we might won't to carefully consider the implications of a) moving more reviews into the bylaws, and b) the ability to work around the bylaws when convenient. I do not believe that avoiding current accountability mechanisms is a good tool for establising stronger accountability. avri On 29-Jun-15 09:44, Mathieu Weill wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
A quick way to contribute to this call for comment would be to to submit a CCWG comment saying : stall the AoC reviews until approval of the new Bylaws which will be related to these reviews.
Same for organizational reviews to avoid potential conflicting priorities with the SO/AC accountability discussion.
Icann could, as a consequence, allocate more resources to supporting our work ;-)
I am conscious this is very last minute, and don't want to rrush any decision. Unless there is clear support or other views getting traction within our group, we will most certainly abstain.
best Mathieu
Le 24/06/2015 19:02, Alice Jansen a écrit :
Dear all,
For your information ---
A session on AoC and Organizational Reviews: Supporting ICANN Accountability <http://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-aoc-org-reviews> took place this morning at ICANN53. This session covered Reviews defined by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) and Organizational Reviews, mandated by ICANN's Bylaws. Topics included: proposed schedule for upcoming reviews, proposed process and operational improvements to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of reviews, implementation status of recommendations from the Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2), the Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review (SSR) and the "WHOIS Policy" Review (WHOIS).
Please note that community feedback is currently being sought on a proposed schedule and process, including operational improvements, for Reviews mandated by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC Reviews) and the ICANN Bylaws (Organizational Reviews). The request for the community is based on both appreciating the community's workload and the timing of several Reviews in FY2016. The public comment on Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-2015-...> will close on 2 July. Comments can be submitted to comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15@icann.org
If you have any questions about this public comment proceeding, please contact Larisa Gurnick at l <mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>arisa.gurnick@icann.org <mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>.
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Dear Mathieu! What do you mean by stall? Stoping them? I couldn't agree less. There are still recommendations of ATRT2 that have not been implemented yet. Stopping the AoC would be a very negative message if we are looking for a permanent culture of accountability inside the Corporation. Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter skype carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (New Phone number!!!!) ________ Apartado 1571-1000 COSTA RICA On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
A quick way to contribute to this call for comment would be to to submit a CCWG comment saying : stall the AoC reviews until approval of the new Bylaws which will be related to these reviews.
Same for organizational reviews to avoid potential conflicting priorities with the SO/AC accountability discussion.
Icann could, as a consequence, allocate more resources to supporting our work ;-)
I am conscious this is very last minute, and don't want to rrush any decision. Unless there is clear support or other views getting traction within our group, we will most certainly abstain.
best Mathieu
Le 24/06/2015 19:02, Alice Jansen a écrit :
Dear all,
For your information ---
A session on AoC and Organizational Reviews: Supporting ICANN Accountability <http://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-aoc-org-reviews> took place this morning at ICANN53. This session covered Reviews defined by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) and Organizational Reviews, mandated by ICANN's Bylaws. Topics included: proposed schedule for upcoming reviews, proposed process and operational improvements to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of reviews, implementation status of recommendations from the Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2), the Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review (SSR) and the "WHOIS Policy" Review (WHOIS).
Please note that community feedback is currently being sought on a proposed schedule and process, including operational improvements, for Reviews mandated by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC Reviews) and the ICANN Bylaws (Organizational Reviews). The request for the community is based on both appreciating the community's workload and the timing of several Reviews in FY2016. The public comment on Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-2015-...> will close on 2 July. Comments can be submitted to comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15@icann.org
If you have any questions about this public comment proceeding, please contact Larisa Gurnick at l <larisa.gurnick@icann.org> arisa.gurnick@icann.org <larisa.gurnick@icann.org>.
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing listAccountability-Cross-Community@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Folks, The challenge here is that there are 7 reviews scheduled for next year. The community simply doesn’t have the bandwidth to do them all well. I think I agree with Avri that we don’t suspend the notion of review because of our work but we DO need to think about volunteer burnout. Two thoughts on the consequences. First, I find it frustrating that we think of reviews as impetus for implementation. That’s a total waste. We need to figure out some other mechanism to maintain momentum that isn’t a full blown review. Some kind of IAG or something would be better. The whole point of a review is to see if the changes had the desired outcome, not to simply restate the need for the changes. That’s like hammering a nail with a bus instead of a hammer. Can’t we find a more precise mechanism for implementation monitoring and pressure? Second, in my mind, accountability is less about timing than about critical path. In other words, I can see pushing off reviews of the new gTLD program as long as we push off the start of a new round. Given the supply driven nature of this marketplace, the world can afford a delay and we can get it right instead of rushing. Just my two cents. Jonathan From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Raul Gutierrez Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 10:13 AM To: Mathieu Weill Cc: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] FYI - Public Comment on AoC and Organizational Reviews Dear Mathieu! What do you mean by stall? Stoping them? I couldn't agree less. There are still recommendations of ATRT2 that have not been implemented yet. Stopping the AoC would be a very negative message if we are looking for a permanent culture of accountability inside the Corporation. Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter skype carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (New Phone number!!!!) ________ Apartado 1571-1000 COSTA RICA On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, A quick way to contribute to this call for comment would be to to submit a CCWG comment saying : stall the AoC reviews until approval of the new Bylaws which will be related to these reviews. Same for organizational reviews to avoid potential conflicting priorities with the SO/AC accountability discussion. Icann could, as a consequence, allocate more resources to supporting our work ;-) I am conscious this is very last minute, and don't want to rrush any decision. Unless there is clear support or other views getting traction within our group, we will most certainly abstain. best Mathieu Le 24/06/2015 19:02, Alice Jansen a écrit : Dear all, For your information --- A session on AoC and Organizational Reviews: Supporting ICANN Accountability<http://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-aoc-org-reviews> took place this morning at ICANN53. This session covered Reviews defined by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) and Organizational Reviews, mandated by ICANN's Bylaws. Topics included: proposed schedule for upcoming reviews, proposed process and operational improvements to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of reviews, implementation status of recommendations from the Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2), the Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review (SSR) and the "WHOIS Policy" Review (WHOIS). Please note that community feedback is currently being sought on a proposed schedule and process, including operational improvements, for Reviews mandated by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC Reviews) and the ICANN Bylaws (Organizational Reviews). The request for the community is based on both appreciating the community's workload and the timing of several Reviews in FY2016. The public comment on Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-2015-...> will close on 2 July. Comments can be submitted to comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15@icann.org<mailto:comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15@icann.org> If you have any questions about this public comment proceeding, please contact Larisa Gurnick at l<mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>arisa.gurnick@icann.org<mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>. _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community -- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06<tel:%2B33%201%2039%2030%2083%2006> mathieu.weill@afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> Twitter : @mathieuweill ***************************** _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
I don't read Mathieu's suggestion as "stopping" or "avoiding" AoC Reviews. Rather, I think it is a matter of sorting out all that is in front of us as a community, as an organization and as stakeholders. There are at least two issues at play here: 1. *Potential "Reviewmageddon"*: An avalanche of reviews in 2015-2016. Factoring in AoC reviews, ATRT3 reviews, New gTLD Program reviews and the by-laws based organizational reviews, we have a review calendar that may constitute cruel and unusual punishment. This increases the risk of volunteer burnout, staff burnout, inattention to issues, suboptimal work product, and increased breakdowns outside the Reviewmageddon in a community already taxed by IANA/Accountability (and don't forget Work Stream 2!). It might be fun to put all that on a calendar and see how it looks -- more fun than to try to work through it. Something needs to be done to relieve this situation. Merely pushing the organizational reviews back does not relieve that much of the pressure. 2. *Interplay between Accountability Work and AoC Reviews*: The AoC reviews will be reviewing a moving target, as the work of the CWG and CCWG changes ICANN. The AoC itself may disappear (subsumed in large part into the bylaws) before the AoC reviews are completed. New bylaws, processes and structures will make it difficult to review ICANN in midstream -- are these reviews of ICANN before, during or after IANA/Accountability changes -- or all 3? Of course, this would need to be worked out with NTIA, not declared unilaterally (but I don't think anyone was suggesting that). In any event, we are best placed to consider the interplay between our work and the AoC reviews. On top of that, I sense and share Mathieu's concern that increased focus on a multiplicity of reviews will drain participants and support from the CCWG-Accountability. While this may seem parochial, it is a well-founded concern, and a chair, Mathieu's job description includes worrying about the CCWG even when the focus of others is elsewhere. I'm sure Mathieu is not being monomaniacal, but it is his job (along with his co-Chairs) to warn us that this is not "business as usual" and that the times call for ample emphasis on and prioritizing of the work of the CCWG-Accountability. These are valid concerns. I would support a comment along the lines Mathieu proposes. Greg On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@actonline.org> wrote:
Folks,
The challenge here is that there are 7 reviews scheduled for next year. The community simply doesn’t have the bandwidth to do them all well. I think I agree with Avri that we don’t suspend the notion of review because of our work but we DO need to think about volunteer burnout.
Two thoughts on the consequences. First, I find it frustrating that we think of reviews as impetus for implementation. That’s a total waste. We need to figure out some other mechanism to maintain momentum that isn’t a full blown review. Some kind of IAG or something would be better. The whole point of a review is to see if the changes had the desired outcome, not to simply restate the need for the changes. That’s like hammering a nail with a bus instead of a hammer. Can’t we find a more precise mechanism for implementation monitoring and pressure?
Second, in my mind, accountability is less about timing than about critical path. In other words, I can see pushing off reviews of the new gTLD program as long as we push off the start of a new round. Given the supply driven nature of this marketplace, the world can afford a delay and we can get it right instead of rushing.
Just my two cents.
Jonathan
*From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Carlos Raul Gutierrez *Sent:* Monday, June 29, 2015 10:13 AM *To:* Mathieu Weill *Cc:* accountability-cross-community@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] FYI - Public Comment on AoC and Organizational Reviews
Dear Mathieu!
What do you mean by stall? Stoping them? I couldn't agree less. There are still recommendations of ATRT2 that have not been implemented yet. Stopping the AoC would be a very negative message if we are looking for a permanent culture of accountability inside the Corporation.
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter skype carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (New Phone number!!!!) ________ Apartado 1571-1000 COSTA RICA
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
A quick way to contribute to this call for comment would be to to submit a CCWG comment saying : stall the AoC reviews until approval of the new Bylaws which will be related to these reviews.
Same for organizational reviews to avoid potential conflicting priorities with the SO/AC accountability discussion.
Icann could, as a consequence, allocate more resources to supporting our work ;-)
I am conscious this is very last minute, and don't want to rrush any decision. Unless there is clear support or other views getting traction within our group, we will most certainly abstain.
best Mathieu
Le 24/06/2015 19:02, Alice Jansen a écrit :
Dear all,
For your information ---
A session on AoC and Organizational Reviews: Supporting ICANN Accountability <http://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-aoc-org-reviews> took place this morning at ICANN53. This session covered Reviews defined by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) and Organizational Reviews, mandated by ICANN's Bylaws. Topics included: proposed schedule for upcoming reviews, proposed process and operational improvements to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of reviews, implementation status of recommendations from the Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2), the Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review (SSR) and the "WHOIS Policy" Review (WHOIS).
Please note that community feedback is currently being sought on a proposed schedule and process, including operational improvements, for Reviews mandated by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC Reviews) and the ICANN Bylaws (Organizational Reviews). The request for the community is based on both appreciating the community's workload and the timing of several Reviews in FY2016. The public comment on Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-2015-...> will close on 2 July. Comments can be submitted to comments-proposed-aoc-org-reviews-process-15may15@icann.org
If you have any questions about this public comment proceeding, please contact Larisa Gurnick at l <larisa.gurnick@icann.org> arisa.gurnick@icann.org <larisa.gurnick@icann.org>.
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--
*****************************
Mathieu WEILL
AFNIC - directeur général
Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
mathieu.weill@afnic.fr
Twitter : @mathieuweill
*****************************
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Hi, AOC reviews are always against a moving target. ICANN generally does not stop doing stuff during an AOC review. avri On 29-Jun-15 11:46, Greg Shatan wrote:
2. _Interplay between Accountability Work and AoC Reviews_: The AoC reviews will be reviewing a moving target, as the work of the CWG and CCWG changes ICANN. The AoC itself may disappear (subsumed in large part into the bylaws) before the AoC reviews are completed. New bylaws, processes and structures will make it difficult to review ICANN in midstream -- are these reviews of ICANN before, during or after IANA/Accountability changes -- or all 3? Of course, this would need to be worked out with NTIA, not declared unilaterally (but I don't think anyone was suggesting that). In any event, we are best placed to consider the interplay between our work and the AoC reviews.
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
This is not merely a moving target, it is a transforming one. That is not merely a slight deviation from the typical and inevitable ICANN moving target, it is a whole different kettle of fish. Greg On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
Hi,
AOC reviews are always against a moving target. ICANN generally does not stop doing stuff during an AOC review.
avri
On 29-Jun-15 11:46, Greg Shatan wrote:
2. _Interplay between Accountability Work and AoC Reviews_: The AoC reviews will be reviewing a moving target, as the work of the CWG and CCWG changes ICANN. The AoC itself may disappear (subsumed in large part into the bylaws) before the AoC reviews are completed. New bylaws, processes and structures will make it difficult to review ICANN in midstream -- are these reviews of ICANN before, during or after IANA/Accountability changes -- or all 3? Of course, this would need to be worked out with NTIA, not declared unilaterally (but I don't think anyone was suggesting that). In any event, we are best placed to consider the interplay between our work and the AoC reviews.
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
participants (6)
-
Alice Jansen -
Avri Doria -
Carlos Raul Gutierrez -
Greg Shatan -
Jonathan Zuck -
Mathieu Weill