Dear Kurt, Thanks for the early input. Your email doesn't seem to have made it to the council list - or to its archive - (or use of a different email than the one subscribed, anyway I hope this one does.) Dear Councilors, The follow-up discussion on the impact of SSAD Light on Other Work is on next week's agenda under item 5, so please consider chiming in. Thank you. Regards, Philippe Orange Restricted -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Pritz <kp@art.art> Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 10:09 AM To: FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org>; RySG ExComs <excoms@rysg.info> Subject: Impact of SSAD Light on Other Work Dear Philippe: During the 17 May Council discussion on the Impact of SSAD Light on Other Work, the RySG representative indicated that our stakeholder group had not had the opportunity to meet and develop a recommendation, given our meeting cadence and the timing of the publication of the meeting agenda. In order to keep the discussion timely, you requested, and we agreed, that the RySG provide feedback via email rather than wait for the next Council meeting. We appreciate the sense of urgency and are providing that feedback now. Our initial and stronger inclination is that this prioritization is an ICANN call. These are managerial decisions based on operational analysis of available resources, skillset requirements, competing projects, efficiencies, and scheduling impacts. This level of complexity gives us pause as to whether we or the Council can competently provide advice based on the information provided to us. When called upon to opine, we find ourselves asking the sorts of detailed questions that anyone faced with operational decisions would ask: about switching costs, risks, alternatives, and so on. We think it is appropriate for us to avoid operations questions such as these that are better left to staff expertise. Decisions regarding whether to keep or slip schedules are ICANN’s. Our second inclination is that these projects should not be paused at this time. Ordinarily (and even though decisions of how to proceed with an SSAD-light model is a still a matter of close debate), it would make sense to pull this work forward as a low-risk way to accelerate the schedule. However, this type of acceleration would be preferred only in cases where there exist slack resources that are available to perform the work. This request for re-prioritization guidance demonstrates that this is not the case. We recognize the importance of SSAD progress but, given what we know, believe these other ongoing projects (i.e., the SubPro ODP, CZDS and EBERO) should not be paused at this time. The facts that an SSAD-light approach is not settled, slack resources are not available, and reorganizing the three other projects presents an un-described set of risks has resulted in a stakeholder group preference in favour of continuing the projects where the scope is known, and the timetables are comparably urgent. Sincerely, Maxim Alzoba Sebastien Ducos Kurt Pritz RySG Councilors _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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.