Hey Steve ... So Sorry for the tardy timing on my reply... I dared to take time time off over the w'end, but am now back on deck (although perhaps like all of us more 'drowning than waiving in this pre Singapore Meeting #52 week) ... So that said (and i trust my apology accepted); Steve, THANKS YOU so much for this great work, it certainly should get us well and truly started... Please see inter-spaced below some responses from me *<CLO>* and I hope we will also get some feedback from the rest of the ST-WP... ALSO - Question for you all... Does anyone object to me transferring this excellent work piece from Steve to our ST-WP Wiki page ? We can/will of course continue to work on this list via email but we should I believe also emulate/archive our work on the Wiki for the sake of both transparency and of course to facilitate any direct contributions via that media... *Cheryl Langdon-O**rr ... *(CLO) about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr [image: Cheryl Langdon-Orr on about.me] <http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr> On 1 February 2015 at 10:50, Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> wrote:
Cheryl and James,
Just trying to maintain momentum for our new work party on contingencies/stress tests (ST-WP <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/ST-WP+--+Stress+Test+Work+...>). As discussed, we start with the consolidated doc we developed in Frankfurt.
*<CLO> Push to gaining some momentum appreciatively noted...* Thanks Steve :-)
On page 1, added excerpt from our charter, regarding our required deliverables for Stress Testing.
On page 2, added a table showing how the original 25 stress tests mapped to the 5 consolidated categories. This captures the narrative and consequences developed by Work Team 4.
On page 4, added Enterprise-Wide Risks identified by the ICANN Board Risk Committee (27-Jan-2015). The chairs asked us compare to our list and see if changes are suggested. I mapped these items to our 5 stress test categories, noting in red those that are not covered.
*<CLO> Can I ask * * if we can agree to accepting those currently in red, additions from Steve please? *
2 risks that are not explicitly listed in our categories include loss of confidence in M-S model as practiced by iCANN, and lack of capacity to accommodate new stakeholders. I think we can add those to categories IV and V. Agreed? *<CLO> * *I agree... Anyone else??*
**
**
Before we get to Singapore, we should draft another action item from the chairs: *Add a specific contingency. * I think of this as example application of stress test against recommended accountability mechanisms. Could do this after we have sufficient consensus around accountability mechanisms to evaluate. *<CLO> agreed but I seriously doubt we will get this done before Singapore though it clearly needs to be done ... I also believe if we can tat we should try and take a bit of time together if we can find it when we all arrive in Singapore for an informal discussion, Can we ascertain who arrives when I arrive late Friday afternoon (ETA for landing is 6th at 1630 local time) and could meet up with some of you on Friday evening perhaps... Anyone else available then???* Alternatively, we could perform stress test analysis on the Requirements we developed in Frankfurt. I can take a stab at that during the long trip this week, if folks agree. *<CLO> I think that would be terrific if you do have the time... Thanks *
—Steve
On 27-Jan call <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51414998>, the chairs tasked us with:
Contingencies : organising further work (inc. feedback from Board committee) Agreed on a list of 21 contingencies. Agreed to provide additional analysis to these by responding to a list of questions, after discussion of an appropriate lists if questions. Request to the Board Risk Committee of the contingencies they use as part of their risk management, a communication has been received from the committee. Comparison shows a couple of items to be updates.
Next steps to answer the various questions: Are there existing remedies in place ? How robust are these remedies ? Could addressing the contingency be achieved through amending existing accountability mechanisms or is creating new ones necessary ? How relevant is the threat to the transition of the IANA stewardship ? ie how does the transition affect the likelihood of the threat, or the severeness of the consequences ? Reframe the questions and ask whether contingencies from Board Risk are either in WS1 or WS2 based on our Charter. Action: *Add a specific contingency part to the communication materials that we'll edit in Singapore. *
— Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org <http://www.netchoice.org/> and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482