Hi All,

I received a few questions regarding changes to the 18 May version of the project list, so I thought it best to respond to everyone.

Content wise, there were not many changes to projects since the version from April. The most notable one relate to:

EPDP-P2 – at the task level, items are marked red as there is considerable risk that review of comments may cause delay to the delivery the Final Report, but not yet enough to change the overall Status/Health.
CCWG Auctions – approaching the final consensus call and delivery of their final report to the Board/C.O.s is still on schedule by close of May.
RPMs – public comment proceeding closed and the WG is starting review of the submissions.
SubPro – the WG is still advancing towards their public comment release of July.

Project List Structure wise, there are several changes on the summary page and order of projects. This version is based on discussions among the Council leadership and staff.

A column to assign Projects to their respective Program as we discussed the concept of organizing our work by Program at the SPS-2020.
The policy development process diagram at top now attempts to highlight who owns/manages the project through its phases.
Projects rearranged to better recognize a project sponsored by span of control (below the black line after “7 – Implementation). For example, IRP_IOT, WS2 and GEO. The Council does not have authority to represent the Status/Health of these. We could make the same argument that it should apply to CCWG Auctions, but it is so close to completion, it made sense to leave it where it is, but future similar efforts seem better served tagged as “Other”. The other consideration is how involved are GNSO Policy staff resources on such a project and largely why it was tagged under Phase 4 all this time.
The standing committees retagged from Other to Standing Committee.
Those projects in stages 6 & 7, the % Complete was removed. As noted before, GNSO Policy staff do not own these projects and there’s still open questions about how best to represent the Status/Health of these. Removal of Days, Status, Health starts to make those columns less significant and/or bare, but the Council ultimately owns the outcome.
One aspect outstanding is how the Council better represent the pipeline of work ahead. Looking at the “Council Future Work Plan” that Steve sent last week, some of those items appear here on the project list, and some are reflected on the Action Items list. How can we recognize this future work without reducing the effectiveness of managing current work?

I hope you’ll find this helpful and happy to answer further questions.

Thank you.

Berry Cobb

@berrycobb

GNSO Policy Consultant

From: policy@bacinblack.com <policy@bacinblack.com>
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 15:21
To: council@gnso.icann.org
Subject: GNSO Project List - 18 May 2020

Dear All,

Please find attached the latest version of the GNSO Council’s Projects List for the meeting on 21 May 2020. Per the agenda, the Council will not review the project list in detail. However, after your review and should you find an area that you have questions or needs clarification, you will have the opportunity to do so under agenda item #2.

https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Final+Proposed+Agenda+21+May+2020

Thank you.

Berry Cobb

@berrycobb

GNSO Policy Consultant