Fwd: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Dear Council colleagues, An update on the status of SSR2 and the involvement of the SO/AC leaders. We (SO/AC leaders) received the emails below from Denise and SSR2 with attached scoping document and skills matrix, and a request as to whether this meets our requirements to "unpause" their work. We met a few hours ago (our first call since ICANN60) to discuss. My initial response to the SO/AC leaders was that I felt that we collectively were now placed in a difficult position by the Board, as it was the Board's requirements (the detail and extent of which are still only specified at a high level) that occasioned the "pause", and now we're being asked by SSR2 if their documentation meets the community's requirements. While I acknowledge that SO/AC leaders collectively took responsibility for re-starting SSR2 in our email of 2 Nov, in practice this is awkward, as we have somehow assumed the Board's (and/or SSAC's) concerns. My view on this was not shared by SSAC (logical, given their letter to Board re SSR2), nor by ccNSO, ALAC or RSSAC (GAC not present on the call)- it seems these communities have concerns about SSR2 but there is reluctance to document these formally. Concerns were raised by other leaders about the group's ability to work together constructively. I haven't heard anything to this extent, so insisted that, if this is the case, it needs to be documented. The proposed path forward, which I generally support provided that it is done in such a way as to preserve the integrity of SSR2, is to follow up on their skills matrix with specific questions about what SSR2 participants believe, if anything, the community can do (ie, add members to SSR2 to fill weaker skill areas) to facilitate their work. We're looking at a next call in one week's time, in order to get back to SSR2 as quickly as possible. Please take the skills matrix and scoping document back to your SGs and Cs for discussion. If your groups believe it is helpful or appropriate to provide input to SSR2, please do so directly. Many thanks and best wishes, Heather ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Dear SO & AC Chairs: Please find attached a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective of the scope of this review, and a skill matrix developed and completed by a majority of the Team. As requested, the SSR2 is completing these requested items to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” We hope this meets your requirements regarding the Review Team’s perspective on the scope of this review and relevant, useful skills. The current Terms of Reference for SSR2’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found here <https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/Terms+of+Reference?preview=/64076120/64948210/SSR2-TermsofReference-CLEAN%20v4.0%20ET.docx>. Additional information on SSR2 activities, including the work plan can be found on the Review Team’s wiki <https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/SSR2+Review>. Please let us know if you require anything further. We’d appreciate confirmation of receipt of this email and of the 4 Nov. email (copy included below), as well as a response to our previous request for information regarding the Team’s “un-pausing” (see below). Regards, The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2) *From: *<ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Denise Michel < denisemichel@fb.com> *Date: *Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 12:16 AM *To: *SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> *Cc: *SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> *Subject: *[Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review Dear SO/AC Chairs: As one of the co-chairs of the SSR2, I’ve been asked to share an informal update on the Review Team’s work, and a query. The SSR2 met Friday 3 Nov., addressed scope and skills as directed, and then adjourned, since our work is “paused.” Specifically, the Review Team developed a skills matrix and a document clarifying SSR2’s scope/terms of reference. These drafts have been shared with all Review Team members for edits (not all participated in the 3 Nov. meeting), and we plan to finalize and deliver them to you next week. (Note that SSR2 operates by consensus and input from all Team members may necessitate a slight extension of this schedule, or not). The SSR2 would appreciate receiving information from the chairs on how and when you will decide on “un-pausing” this review. As you can appreciate, the Review Team’s volunteers would like more certainty as to their schedules. SSR2 previously planned a January face-to-face drafting session for which time has been blocked on our calendars and travel arrangements have been made. Please advise if we should cancel these. Please let us know if you need anything else from the Review Team (cc’d). Best, Denise Denise Michel *denisemichel@fb.com <denisemichel@fb.com>* *From: *Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> *Date: *Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 7:29 PM *To: *Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> *Cc: *SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Eric Osterweil <eosterweil@verisign.com> *Subject: *Re: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review Your interpretation is correct. The goal now is to unpause SSR2. Please not that I do not have posting rights to the SSR2 list, so the moderated message must be released or forwarded by someone with posting rights. Best, Patrik On 2 Nov 2017, at 21:06, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote: Thanks for forwarding, Patrick. Could the SO/AC Chairs please clarify the SSR2’s status tonight as the SSR2 is meeting tomorrow morning. My quick read of this indicates that SSR2 is still “paused” except that the Team is to address “resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” That takes the work plan and other items off the table. Thanks for clarifying. Best Denise Denise Michel Sent via phone _____________________________ From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 7:42 PM Subject: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil@verisign.com>, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> STATEMENT FROM SO/AC CHAIRS ON THE SUSPENSION OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY REVIEW The Chairs of ICANN’s Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs) acknowledge the 28 October 2017 announcement from the Board of Directors, pausing the work of the Security, Stability and Resiliency Review Team (SSR2-RT), and the Board's having tasked the SOs and ACs in sessions this week with addressing concerns raised by the Board, Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC), and the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC). Collectively, we accept responsibility for getting SSR2-RT restarted as expeditiously as possible. During various sessions throughout ICANN60, our groups have met with the Board and/or members of SSR2-RT to hear their concerns. We intend to continue to consult with our respective communities, and each other, to assess and address issues relating to the scope, composition and participation, resource utilization, and overall work plan of the Review. Additionally, the Board’s unilateral decision to suspend the work of a key accountability mechanism has raised questions that go to the independence of SSR2-RT, and specific reviews going forward. As a follow-on effort, we intend to examine the selection and scoping process for review teams, and develop a clear and predictable process for raising and addressing concerns about review teams. We also intend to carefully consider the Board's action, with a view to preventing similar instances in the future. We look forward to working collaboratively with the Board, SSR2-RT and the broader community on this task. The SO/AC Chairs support the SSR2 RT meeting on Friday, 3 November 2017, and followup telephone conferences when needed. These are necessary so that the team can work on resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills. Finally, we wish to acknowledge the efforts of our colleagues on the SSR2-RT to date, and thank them for their continued commitment towards security, stability and resiliency. Alan Greenberg (Chair ALAC) Patrik Fältström (Outgoing Chair SSAC) Rod Rasmussen (Incoming Chair SSAC) Katrina Sataki (Chair ccNSO) Thomas Schneider (Outgoing Chair GAC) Manal Ismail (Incoming Chair GAC) James Bladel (Outgoing Chair GNSO Council) Heather Forrest (Incoming Chair GNSO Council) Tripti Sinha(Co-Chair RSSAC) Brad Verd (Co-Chair RSSAC) _______________________________________________ soac-chairs mailing list soac-chairs@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-chairs
Thanks Heather! Long ago based on my previous experience with the 2nd Accountability Review, while the AOC reviews were translated into the new By Laws, I made the specific suggestion that for any Review, the Corporation had to publish a yearly report, on a common date for all reviews, reporting on its study and/or implementation phase, so that any one who had not participated before could easily catch up where the Review and its implementation stands. The suggestion was made to one off the WG leaded by Steve del Bianco if I remember correctly. Today, after my second review experience with the CCT and more than ever it is necessary in my view to bring about some common reporting denominator to all reviews, on a regular basis, so that we have a common benchmark to compare and hopefully avoid what is happening here with SSR2. In any case I consider it very important that the Council adds to its strategy discussion the issue of the challenges the former AOC Reviews are facing after the transition. Best regards Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter skype carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 ________ Apartado 1571-1000 COSTA RICA On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
An update on the status of SSR2 and the involvement of the SO/AC leaders.
We (SO/AC leaders) received the emails below from Denise and SSR2 with attached scoping document and skills matrix, and a request as to whether this meets our requirements to "unpause" their work. We met a few hours ago (our first call since ICANN60) to discuss.
My initial response to the SO/AC leaders was that I felt that we collectively were now placed in a difficult position by the Board, as it was the Board's requirements (the detail and extent of which are still only specified at a high level) that occasioned the "pause", and now we're being asked by SSR2 if their documentation meets the community's requirements. While I acknowledge that SO/AC leaders collectively took responsibility for re-starting SSR2 in our email of 2 Nov, in practice this is awkward, as we have somehow assumed the Board's (and/or SSAC's) concerns. My view on this was not shared by SSAC (logical, given their letter to Board re SSR2), nor by ccNSO, ALAC or RSSAC (GAC not present on the call)- it seems these communities have concerns about SSR2 but there is reluctance to document these formally.
Concerns were raised by other leaders about the group's ability to work together constructively. I haven't heard anything to this extent, so insisted that, if this is the case, it needs to be documented.
The proposed path forward, which I generally support provided that it is done in such a way as to preserve the integrity of SSR2, is to follow up on their skills matrix with specific questions about what SSR2 participants believe, if anything, the community can do (ie, add members to SSR2 to fill weaker skill areas) to facilitate their work.
We're looking at a next call in one week's time, in order to get back to SSR2 as quickly as possible.
Please take the skills matrix and scoping document back to your SGs and Cs for discussion. If your groups believe it is helpful or appropriate to provide input to SSR2, please do so directly.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Heather
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org>
Dear SO & AC Chairs:
Please find attached a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective of the scope of this review, and a skill matrix developed and completed by a majority of the Team. As requested, the SSR2 is completing these requested items to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.”
We hope this meets your requirements regarding the Review Team’s perspective on the scope of this review and relevant, useful skills. The current Terms of Reference for SSR2’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found here <https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/Terms+of+Reference?preview=/64076120/64948210/SSR2-TermsofReference-CLEAN%20v4.0%20ET.docx>. Additional information on SSR2 activities, including the work plan can be found on the Review Team’s wiki <https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/SSR2+Review>.
Please let us know if you require anything further.
We’d appreciate confirmation of receipt of this email and of the 4 Nov. email (copy included below), as well as a response to our previous request for information regarding the Team’s “un-pausing” (see below).
Regards,
The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2)
*From: *<ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Denise Michel < denisemichel@fb.com> *Date: *Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 12:16 AM *To: *SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> *Cc: *SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> *Subject: *[Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Dear SO/AC Chairs:
As one of the co-chairs of the SSR2, I’ve been asked to share an informal update on the Review Team’s work, and a query.
The SSR2 met Friday 3 Nov., addressed scope and skills as directed, and then adjourned, since our work is “paused.” Specifically, the Review Team developed a skills matrix and a document clarifying SSR2’s scope/terms of reference. These drafts have been shared with all Review Team members for edits (not all participated in the 3 Nov. meeting), and we plan to finalize and deliver them to you next week. (Note that SSR2 operates by consensus and input from all Team members may necessitate a slight extension of this schedule, or not).
The SSR2 would appreciate receiving information from the chairs on how and when you will decide on “un-pausing” this review. As you can appreciate, the Review Team’s volunteers would like more certainty as to their schedules. SSR2 previously planned a January face-to-face drafting session for which time has been blocked on our calendars and travel arrangements have been made. Please advise if we should cancel these.
Please let us know if you need anything else from the Review Team (cc’d).
Best,
Denise
Denise Michel
*denisemichel@fb.com <denisemichel@fb.com>*
*From: *Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> *Date: *Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 7:29 PM *To: *Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> *Cc: *SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Eric Osterweil <eosterweil@verisign.com> *Subject: *Re: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Your interpretation is correct. The goal now is to unpause SSR2.
Please not that I do not have posting rights to the SSR2 list, so the moderated message must be released or forwarded by someone with posting rights.
Best, Patrik
On 2 Nov 2017, at 21:06, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Thanks for forwarding, Patrick.
Could the SO/AC Chairs please clarify the SSR2’s status tonight as the SSR2 is meeting tomorrow morning.
My quick read of this indicates that SSR2 is still “paused” except that the Team is to address “resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” That takes the work plan and other items off the table.
Thanks for clarifying.
Best
Denise
Denise Michel
Sent via phone
_____________________________ From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 7:42 PM Subject: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil@verisign.com>, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com>
STATEMENT FROM SO/AC CHAIRS ON THE SUSPENSION OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY REVIEW
The Chairs of ICANN’s Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs) acknowledge the 28 October 2017 announcement from the Board of Directors, pausing the work of the Security, Stability and Resiliency Review Team (SSR2-RT), and the Board's having tasked the SOs and ACs in sessions this week with addressing concerns raised by the Board, Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC), and the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC).
Collectively, we accept responsibility for getting SSR2-RT restarted as expeditiously as possible. During various sessions throughout ICANN60, our groups have met with the Board and/or members of SSR2-RT to hear their concerns. We intend to continue to consult with our respective communities, and each other, to assess and address issues relating to the scope, composition and participation, resource utilization, and overall work plan of the Review.
Additionally, the Board’s unilateral decision to suspend the work of a key accountability mechanism has raised questions that go to the independence of SSR2-RT, and specific reviews going forward. As a follow-on effort, we intend to examine the selection and scoping process for review teams, and develop a clear and predictable process for raising and addressing concerns about review teams. We also intend to carefully consider the Board's action, with a view to preventing similar instances in the future. We look forward to working collaboratively with the Board, SSR2-RT and the broader community on this task.
The SO/AC Chairs support the SSR2 RT meeting on Friday, 3 November 2017, and followup telephone conferences when needed. These are necessary so that the team can work on resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.
Finally, we wish to acknowledge the efforts of our colleagues on the SSR2-RT to date, and thank them for their continued commitment towards security, stability and resiliency.
Alan Greenberg (Chair ALAC) Patrik Fältström (Outgoing Chair SSAC) Rod Rasmussen (Incoming Chair SSAC) Katrina Sataki (Chair ccNSO) Thomas Schneider (Outgoing Chair GAC) Manal Ismail (Incoming Chair GAC) James Bladel (Outgoing Chair GNSO Council) Heather Forrest (Incoming Chair GNSO Council) Tripti Sinha(Co-Chair RSSAC) Brad Verd (Co-Chair RSSAC)
_______________________________________________ soac-chairs mailing list soac-chairs@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-chairs
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
Carlos, I’ve seen that for each RT there is now a fact sheet published on a regular basis that lists the % of work completed, budget spent/remaining, milestones, etc. Not sure if that is what you were looking for, but it may be helpful? For example, see CCT factsheet at https://community.icann.org/x/hqbDAw and SSR2 factsheet at https://community.icann.org/x/S7zRAw. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> Date: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 06:23 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Fwd: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review Thanks Heather! Long ago based on my previous experience with the 2nd Accountability Review, while the AOC reviews were translated into the new By Laws, I made the specific suggestion that for any Review, the Corporation had to publish a yearly report, on a common date for all reviews, reporting on its study and/or implementation phase, so that any one who had not participated before could easily catch up where the Review and its implementation stands. The suggestion was made to one off the WG leaded by Steve del Bianco if I remember correctly. Today, after my second review experience with the CCT and more than ever it is necessary in my view to bring about some common reporting denominator to all reviews, on a regular basis, so that we have a common benchmark to compare and hopefully avoid what is happening here with SSR2. In any case I consider it very important that the Council adds to its strategy discussion the issue of the challenges the former AOC Reviews are facing after the transition. Best regards Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter skype carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 ________ Apartado 1571-1000 COSTA RICA On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com<mailto:haforrestesq@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, An update on the status of SSR2 and the involvement of the SO/AC leaders. We (SO/AC leaders) received the emails below from Denise and SSR2 with attached scoping document and skills matrix, and a request as to whether this meets our requirements to "unpause" their work. We met a few hours ago (our first call since ICANN60) to discuss. My initial response to the SO/AC leaders was that I felt that we collectively were now placed in a difficult position by the Board, as it was the Board's requirements (the detail and extent of which are still only specified at a high level) that occasioned the "pause", and now we're being asked by SSR2 if their documentation meets the community's requirements. While I acknowledge that SO/AC leaders collectively took responsibility for re-starting SSR2 in our email of 2 Nov, in practice this is awkward, as we have somehow assumed the Board's (and/or SSAC's) concerns. My view on this was not shared by SSAC (logical, given their letter to Board re SSR2), nor by ccNSO, ALAC or RSSAC (GAC not present on the call)- it seems these communities have concerns about SSR2 but there is reluctance to document these formally. Concerns were raised by other leaders about the group's ability to work together constructively. I haven't heard anything to this extent, so insisted that, if this is the case, it needs to be documented. The proposed path forward, which I generally support provided that it is done in such a way as to preserve the integrity of SSR2, is to follow up on their skills matrix with specific questions about what SSR2 participants believe, if anything, the community can do (ie, add members to SSR2 to fill weaker skill areas) to facilitate their work. We're looking at a next call in one week's time, in order to get back to SSR2 as quickly as possible. Please take the skills matrix and scoping document back to your SGs and Cs for discussion. If your groups believe it is helpful or appropriate to provide input to SSR2, please do so directly. Many thanks and best wishes, Heather ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org>>, SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders@icann.org>> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Dear SO & AC Chairs: Please find attached a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective of the scope of this review, and a skill matrix developed and completed by a majority of the Team. As requested, the SSR2 is completing these requested items to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” We hope this meets your requirements regarding the Review Team’s perspective on the scope of this review and relevant, useful skills. The current Terms of Reference for SSR2’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found here[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_Terms-2Bof-2BReference-3Fpreview-3D_64076120_64948210_SSR2-2DTermsofReference-2DCLEAN-2520v4.0-2520ET.docx&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=cYwoZU_9D2JHgYgW78ODLeUYVXLZezzaUY-o00Q02lY&s=ivghMlYuYKR7fZFqb2SwSbRY4jqc9oTdQQLAlKmiX8U&e=>. Additional information on SSR2 activities, including the work plan can be found on the Review Team’s wiki[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_SSR2-2BReview&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=cYwoZU_9D2JHgYgW78ODLeUYVXLZezzaUY-o00Q02lY&s=1zMsFg9fPjEYVkj8xmRyqA-HuSeZuC4TO5DJpVzH_i4&e=>. Please let us know if you require anything further. We’d appreciate confirmation of receipt of this email and of the 4 Nov. email (copy included below), as well as a response to our previous request for information regarding the Team’s “un-pausing” (see below). Regards, The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2) From: <ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 12:16 AM To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org>>, SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders@icann.org>> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review Dear SO/AC Chairs: As one of the co-chairs of the SSR2, I’ve been asked to share an informal update on the Review Team’s work, and a query. The SSR2 met Friday 3 Nov., addressed scope and skills as directed, and then adjourned, since our work is “paused.” Specifically, the Review Team developed a skills matrix and a document clarifying SSR2’s scope/terms of reference. These drafts have been shared with all Review Team members for edits (not all participated in the 3 Nov. meeting), and we plan to finalize and deliver them to you next week. (Note that SSR2 operates by consensus and input from all Team members may necessitate a slight extension of this schedule, or not). The SSR2 would appreciate receiving information from the chairs on how and when you will decide on “un-pausing” this review. As you can appreciate, the Review Team’s volunteers would like more certainty as to their schedules. SSR2 previously planned a January face-to-face drafting session for which time has been blocked on our calendars and travel arrangements have been made. Please advise if we should cancel these. Please let us know if you need anything else from the Review Team (cc’d). Best, Denise Denise Michel denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com> From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se<mailto:paf@frobbit.se>> Date: Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 7:29 PM To: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Cc: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders@icann.org>>, SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org>>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>>, Eric Osterweil <eosterweil@verisign.com<mailto:eosterweil@verisign.com>> Subject: Re: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review Your interpretation is correct. The goal now is to unpause SSR2. Please not that I do not have posting rights to the SSR2 list, so the moderated message must be released or forwarded by someone with posting rights. Best, Patrik On 2 Nov 2017, at 21:06, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> wrote: Thanks for forwarding, Patrick. Could the SO/AC Chairs please clarify the SSR2’s status tonight as the SSR2 is meeting tomorrow morning. My quick read of this indicates that SSR2 is still “paused” except that the Team is to address “resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” That takes the work plan and other items off the table. Thanks for clarifying. Best Denise Denise Michel Sent via phone _____________________________ From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se<mailto:paf@frobbit.se>> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 7:42 PM Subject: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders@icann.org>>, SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org>>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>>, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil@verisign.com<mailto:eosterweil@verisign.com>>, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> STATEMENT FROM SO/AC CHAIRS ON THE SUSPENSION OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY REVIEW The Chairs of ICANN’s Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs) acknowledge the 28 October 2017 announcement from the Board of Directors, pausing the work of the Security, Stability and Resiliency Review Team (SSR2-RT), and the Board's having tasked the SOs and ACs in sessions this week with addressing concerns raised by the Board, Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC), and the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC). Collectively, we accept responsibility for getting SSR2-RT restarted as expeditiously as possible. During various sessions throughout ICANN60, our groups have met with the Board and/or members of SSR2-RT to hear their concerns. We intend to continue to consult with our respective communities, and each other, to assess and address issues relating to the scope, composition and participation, resource utilization, and overall work plan of the Review. Additionally, the Board’s unilateral decision to suspend the work of a key accountability mechanism has raised questions that go to the independence of SSR2-RT, and specific reviews going forward. As a follow-on effort, we intend to examine the selection and scoping process for review teams, and develop a clear and predictable process for raising and addressing concerns about review teams. We also intend to carefully consider the Board's action, with a view to preventing similar instances in the future. We look forward to working collaboratively with the Board, SSR2-RT and the broader community on this task. The SO/AC Chairs support the SSR2 RT meeting on Friday, 3 November 2017, and followup telephone conferences when needed. These are necessary so that the team can work on resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills. Finally, we wish to acknowledge the efforts of our colleagues on the SSR2-RT to date, and thank them for their continued commitment towards security, stability and resiliency. Alan Greenberg (Chair ALAC) Patrik Fältström (Outgoing Chair SSAC) Rod Rasmussen (Incoming Chair SSAC) Katrina Sataki (Chair ccNSO) Thomas Schneider (Outgoing Chair GAC) Manal Ismail (Incoming Chair GAC) James Bladel (Outgoing Chair GNSO Council) Heather Forrest (Incoming Chair GNSO Council) Tripti Sinha(Co-Chair RSSAC) Brad Verd (Co-Chair RSSAC) _______________________________________________ soac-chairs mailing list soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-chairs _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
Thanks Marika! I'm gonna take a look I think more in terms of a formal, once a year, integral (all reviews together) "Audit/Milestone" document, comparable to last year's, that every body waits for eagerly and does not get lost in the document ocean and each meeting's paper tsunami. In other word 1. give back to the Reviews the high standing the enjoyed under the AoC, that soon nobody will remember. 2. Give it an independent SO/AC accountability flavor (similar to what should be done for the budget process by the way) Carlos Raúl GUTIERREZ Apartado 1571-1000 San José COSTA RICA On Nov 14, 2017 07:25, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Carlos, I’ve seen that for each RT there is now a fact sheet published on a regular basis that lists the % of work completed, budget spent/remaining, milestones, etc. Not sure if that is what you were looking for, but it may be helpful? For example, see CCT factsheet at https://community.icann.org/x/hqbDAw and SSR2 factsheet at https://community.icann.org/x/S7zRAw.
Best regards,
Marika
*From: *council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> *Date: *Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 06:23 *To: *Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List < council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [council] Fwd: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Thanks Heather!
Long ago based on my previous experience with the 2nd Accountability Review, while the AOC reviews were translated into the new By Laws, I made the specific suggestion that for any Review, the Corporation had to publish a yearly report, on a common date for all reviews, reporting on its study and/or implementation phase, so that any one who had not participated before could easily catch up where the Review and its implementation stands. The suggestion was made to one off the WG leaded by Steve del Bianco if I remember correctly.
Today, after my second review experience with the CCT and more than ever it is necessary in my view to bring about some common reporting denominator to all reviews, on a regular basis, so that we have a common benchmark to compare and hopefully avoid what is happening here with SSR2.
In any case I consider it very important that the Council adds to its strategy discussion the issue of the challenges the former AOC Reviews are facing after the transition.
Best regards
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter skype carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 <+506%208837%207176> ________ Apartado 1571-1000 COSTA RICA
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
An update on the status of SSR2 and the involvement of the SO/AC leaders.
We (SO/AC leaders) received the emails below from Denise and SSR2 with attached scoping document and skills matrix, and a request as to whether this meets our requirements to "unpause" their work. We met a few hours ago (our first call since ICANN60) to discuss.
My initial response to the SO/AC leaders was that I felt that we collectively were now placed in a difficult position by the Board, as it was the Board's requirements (the detail and extent of which are still only specified at a high level) that occasioned the "pause", and now we're being asked by SSR2 if their documentation meets the community's requirements. While I acknowledge that SO/AC leaders collectively took responsibility for re-starting SSR2 in our email of 2 Nov, in practice this is awkward, as we have somehow assumed the Board's (and/or SSAC's) concerns. My view on this was not shared by SSAC (logical, given their letter to Board re SSR2), nor by ccNSO, ALAC or RSSAC (GAC not present on the call)- it seems these communities have concerns about SSR2 but there is reluctance to document these formally.
Concerns were raised by other leaders about the group's ability to work together constructively. I haven't heard anything to this extent, so insisted that, if this is the case, it needs to be documented.
The proposed path forward, which I generally support provided that it is done in such a way as to preserve the integrity of SSR2, is to follow up on their skills matrix with specific questions about what SSR2 participants believe, if anything, the community can do (ie, add members to SSR2 to fill weaker skill areas) to facilitate their work.
We're looking at a next call in one week's time, in order to get back to SSR2 as quickly as possible.
Please take the skills matrix and scoping document back to your SGs and Cs for discussion. If your groups believe it is helpful or appropriate to provide input to SSR2, please do so directly.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Heather
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Denise Michel* <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org>
Dear SO & AC Chairs:
Please find attached a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective of the scope of this review, and a skill matrix developed and completed by a majority of the Team. As requested, the SSR2 is completing these requested items to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.”
We hope this meets your requirements regarding the Review Team’s perspective on the scope of this review and relevant, useful skills. The current Terms of Reference for SSR2’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found here[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_Terms-2Bof-2BReference-3Fpreview-3D_64076120_64948210_SSR2-2DTermsofReference-2DCLEAN-2520v4.0-2520ET.docx&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=cYwoZU_9D2JHgYgW78ODLeUYVXLZezzaUY-o00Q02lY&s=ivghMlYuYKR7fZFqb2SwSbRY4jqc9oTdQQLAlKmiX8U&e=>. Additional information on SSR2 activities, including the work plan can be found on the Review Team’s wiki[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_SSR2-2BReview&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=cYwoZU_9D2JHgYgW78ODLeUYVXLZezzaUY-o00Q02lY&s=1zMsFg9fPjEYVkj8xmRyqA-HuSeZuC4TO5DJpVzH_i4&e=> .
Please let us know if you require anything further.
We’d appreciate confirmation of receipt of this email and of the 4 Nov. email (copy included below), as well as a response to our previous request for information regarding the Team’s “un-pausing” (see below).
Regards,
The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2)
*From: *<ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Denise Michel < denisemichel@fb.com> *Date: *Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 12:16 AM *To: *SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> *Cc: *SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> *Subject: *[Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Dear SO/AC Chairs:
As one of the co-chairs of the SSR2, I’ve been asked to share an informal update on the Review Team’s work, and a query.
The SSR2 met Friday 3 Nov., addressed scope and skills as directed, and then adjourned, since our work is “paused.” Specifically, the Review Team developed a skills matrix and a document clarifying SSR2’s scope/terms of reference. These drafts have been shared with all Review Team members for edits (not all participated in the 3 Nov. meeting), and we plan to finalize and deliver them to you next week. (Note that SSR2 operates by consensus and input from all Team members may necessitate a slight extension of this schedule, or not).
The SSR2 would appreciate receiving information from the chairs on how and when you will decide on “un-pausing” this review. As you can appreciate, the Review Team’s volunteers would like more certainty as to their schedules. SSR2 previously planned a January face-to-face drafting session for which time has been blocked on our calendars and travel arrangements have been made. Please advise if we should cancel these.
Please let us know if you need anything else from the Review Team (cc’d).
Best,
Denise
Denise Michel
*denisemichel@fb.com <denisemichel@fb.com>*
*From: *Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> *Date: *Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 7:29 PM *To: *Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> *Cc: *SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Eric Osterweil <eosterweil@verisign.com> *Subject: *Re: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Your interpretation is correct. The goal now is to unpause SSR2.
Please not that I do not have posting rights to the SSR2 list, so the moderated message must be released or forwarded by someone with posting rights.
Best, Patrik
On 2 Nov 2017, at 21:06, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Thanks for forwarding, Patrick.
Could the SO/AC Chairs please clarify the SSR2’s status tonight as the SSR2 is meeting tomorrow morning.
My quick read of this indicates that SSR2 is still “paused” except that the Team is to address “resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” That takes the work plan and other items off the table.
Thanks for clarifying.
Best
Denise
Denise Michel
Sent via phone
_____________________________ From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 7:42 PM Subject: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil@verisign.com>, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com>
STATEMENT FROM SO/AC CHAIRS ON THE SUSPENSION OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY REVIEW
The Chairs of ICANN’s Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs) acknowledge the 28 October 2017 announcement from the Board of Directors, pausing the work of the Security, Stability and Resiliency Review Team (SSR2-RT), and the Board's having tasked the SOs and ACs in sessions this week with addressing concerns raised by the Board, Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC), and the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC).
Collectively, we accept responsibility for getting SSR2-RT restarted as expeditiously as possible. During various sessions throughout ICANN60, our groups have met with the Board and/or members of SSR2-RT to hear their concerns. We intend to continue to consult with our respective communities, and each other, to assess and address issues relating to the scope, composition and participation, resource utilization, and overall work plan of the Review.
Additionally, the Board’s unilateral decision to suspend the work of a key accountability mechanism has raised questions that go to the independence of SSR2-RT, and specific reviews going forward. As a follow-on effort, we intend to examine the selection and scoping process for review teams, and develop a clear and predictable process for raising and addressing concerns about review teams. We also intend to carefully consider the Board's action, with a view to preventing similar instances in the future. We look forward to working collaboratively with the Board, SSR2-RT and the broader community on this task.
The SO/AC Chairs support the SSR2 RT meeting on Friday, 3 November 2017, and followup telephone conferences when needed. These are necessary so that the team can work on resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.
Finally, we wish to acknowledge the efforts of our colleagues on the SSR2-RT to date, and thank them for their continued commitment towards security, stability and resiliency.
Alan Greenberg (Chair ALAC) Patrik Fältström (Outgoing Chair SSAC) Rod Rasmussen (Incoming Chair SSAC) Katrina Sataki (Chair ccNSO) Thomas Schneider (Outgoing Chair GAC) Manal Ismail (Incoming Chair GAC) James Bladel (Outgoing Chair GNSO Council) Heather Forrest (Incoming Chair GNSO Council) Tripti Sinha(Co-Chair RSSAC) Brad Verd (Co-Chair RSSAC)
_______________________________________________ soac-chairs mailing list soac-chairs@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-chairs
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
Thanks for the update Heather. It’s somewhat discerning that other SO/AC leaders continue to have concerns about the SSR2, but are not willing to share publicly what these are. It makes me wonder whether adding more members to the team will actually address any of the concerns or whether we are just providing an interim solution. I’ve been listening to some of the recordings of meetings in Abu Dhabi and it addition to the composition of the SSR2, there also seems to be some resourcing issues in terms of the provision of ICANN staff support. Do we know if this is an issue that is impacting the ability of the SSR2 to meet their published timelines? If there are genuine concerns about the ability of the SSR2 to be a constructive team, the following blogs don’t reflect that: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/an-update-from-the-second-security-stability... https://www.icann.org/news/blog/a-conversation-with-members-of-the-second-se... Given the uncertainty that the SSR2 finds itself, and an admission by Chris Disspain in one of the public sessions in Abu Dhabi, that the Board and the community is in unchartered waters because there is no process for dealing with concerns that may arise about review teams, I wonder whether it makes sense to put the other review team efforts on hold until this is worked through. I recall that Susan and Stephanie did raise some concerns about the potential impact on the work of the RDS/WHOIS2 RT. Donna From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Heather Forrest Sent: Monday, November 13, 2017 5:53 PM To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [council] Fwd: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review Dear Council colleagues, An update on the status of SSR2 and the involvement of the SO/AC leaders. We (SO/AC leaders) received the emails below from Denise and SSR2 with attached scoping document and skills matrix, and a request as to whether this meets our requirements to "unpause" their work. We met a few hours ago (our first call since ICANN60) to discuss. My initial response to the SO/AC leaders was that I felt that we collectively were now placed in a difficult position by the Board, as it was the Board's requirements (the detail and extent of which are still only specified at a high level) that occasioned the "pause", and now we're being asked by SSR2 if their documentation meets the community's requirements. While I acknowledge that SO/AC leaders collectively took responsibility for re-starting SSR2 in our email of 2 Nov, in practice this is awkward, as we have somehow assumed the Board's (and/or SSAC's) concerns. My view on this was not shared by SSAC (logical, given their letter to Board re SSR2), nor by ccNSO, ALAC or RSSAC (GAC not present on the call)- it seems these communities have concerns about SSR2 but there is reluctance to document these formally. Concerns were raised by other leaders about the group's ability to work together constructively. I haven't heard anything to this extent, so insisted that, if this is the case, it needs to be documented. The proposed path forward, which I generally support provided that it is done in such a way as to preserve the integrity of SSR2, is to follow up on their skills matrix with specific questions about what SSR2 participants believe, if anything, the community can do (ie, add members to SSR2 to fill weaker skill areas) to facilitate their work. We're looking at a next call in one week's time, in order to get back to SSR2 as quickly as possible. Please take the skills matrix and scoping document back to your SGs and Cs for discussion. If your groups believe it is helpful or appropriate to provide input to SSR2, please do so directly. Many thanks and best wishes, Heather ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org>>, SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders@icann.org>> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Dear SO & AC Chairs: Please find attached a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective of the scope of this review, and a skill matrix developed and completed by a majority of the Team. As requested, the SSR2 is completing these requested items to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” We hope this meets your requirements regarding the Review Team’s perspective on the scope of this review and relevant, useful skills. The current Terms of Reference for SSR2’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_Terms-2Bof-2BReference-3Fpreview-3D_64076120_64948210_SSR2-2DTermsofReference-2DCLEAN-2520v4.0-2520ET.docx&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=D6jAOlMl7WgCrjuXi175p_rnexflPQ5B5owsPxh4u4w&e=>. Additional information on SSR2 activities, including the work plan can be found on the Review Team’s wiki<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_SSR2-2BReview&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=PZTu7CB4TvTi6KCOPr1RQya7i6HzfwK8ljoEMKfrueg&e=>. Please let us know if you require anything further. We’d appreciate confirmation of receipt of this email and of the 4 Nov. email (copy included below), as well as a response to our previous request for information regarding the Team’s “un-pausing” (see below). Regards, The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2) From: <ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 12:16 AM To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org>>, SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders@icann.org>> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review Dear SO/AC Chairs: As one of the co-chairs of the SSR2, I’ve been asked to share an informal update on the Review Team’s work, and a query. The SSR2 met Friday 3 Nov., addressed scope and skills as directed, and then adjourned, since our work is “paused.” Specifically, the Review Team developed a skills matrix and a document clarifying SSR2’s scope/terms of reference. These drafts have been shared with all Review Team members for edits (not all participated in the 3 Nov. meeting), and we plan to finalize and deliver them to you next week. (Note that SSR2 operates by consensus and input from all Team members may necessitate a slight extension of this schedule, or not). The SSR2 would appreciate receiving information from the chairs on how and when you will decide on “un-pausing” this review. As you can appreciate, the Review Team’s volunteers would like more certainty as to their schedules. SSR2 previously planned a January face-to-face drafting session for which time has been blocked on our calendars and travel arrangements have been made. Please advise if we should cancel these. Please let us know if you need anything else from the Review Team (cc’d). Best, Denise Denise Michel denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com> From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se<mailto:paf@frobbit.se>> Date: Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 7:29 PM To: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Cc: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders@icann.org>>, SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org>>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>>, Eric Osterweil <eosterweil@verisign.com<mailto:eosterweil@verisign.com>> Subject: Re: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review Your interpretation is correct. The goal now is to unpause SSR2. Please not that I do not have posting rights to the SSR2 list, so the moderated message must be released or forwarded by someone with posting rights. Best, Patrik On 2 Nov 2017, at 21:06, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> wrote: Thanks for forwarding, Patrick. Could the SO/AC Chairs please clarify the SSR2’s status tonight as the SSR2 is meeting tomorrow morning. My quick read of this indicates that SSR2 is still “paused” except that the Team is to address “resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” That takes the work plan and other items off the table. Thanks for clarifying. Best Denise Denise Michel Sent via phone _____________________________ From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se<mailto:paf@frobbit.se>> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 7:42 PM Subject: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders@icann.org>>, SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org>>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>>, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil@verisign.com<mailto:eosterweil@verisign.com>>, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> STATEMENT FROM SO/AC CHAIRS ON THE SUSPENSION OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY REVIEW The Chairs of ICANN’s Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs) acknowledge the 28 October 2017 announcement from the Board of Directors, pausing the work of the Security, Stability and Resiliency Review Team (SSR2-RT), and the Board's having tasked the SOs and ACs in sessions this week with addressing concerns raised by the Board, Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC), and the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC). Collectively, we accept responsibility for getting SSR2-RT restarted as expeditiously as possible. During various sessions throughout ICANN60, our groups have met with the Board and/or members of SSR2-RT to hear their concerns. We intend to continue to consult with our respective communities, and each other, to assess and address issues relating to the scope, composition and participation, resource utilization, and overall work plan of the Review. Additionally, the Board’s unilateral decision to suspend the work of a key accountability mechanism has raised questions that go to the independence of SSR2-RT, and specific reviews going forward. As a follow-on effort, we intend to examine the selection and scoping process for review teams, and develop a clear and predictable process for raising and addressing concerns about review teams. We also intend to carefully consider the Board's action, with a view to preventing similar instances in the future. We look forward to working collaboratively with the Board, SSR2-RT and the broader community on this task. The SO/AC Chairs support the SSR2 RT meeting on Friday, 3 November 2017, and followup telephone conferences when needed. These are necessary so that the team can work on resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills. Finally, we wish to acknowledge the efforts of our colleagues on the SSR2-RT to date, and thank them for their continued commitment towards security, stability and resiliency. Alan Greenberg (Chair ALAC) Patrik Fältström (Outgoing Chair SSAC) Rod Rasmussen (Incoming Chair SSAC) Katrina Sataki (Chair ccNSO) Thomas Schneider (Outgoing Chair GAC) Manal Ismail (Incoming Chair GAC) James Bladel (Outgoing Chair GNSO Council) Heather Forrest (Incoming Chair GNSO Council) Tripti Sinha(Co-Chair RSSAC) Brad Verd (Co-Chair RSSAC) _______________________________________________ soac-chairs mailing list soac-chairs@icann.org<mailto:soac-chairs@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-chairs<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_soac-2Dchairs&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=o3Jg526lrPopCbRLqUeom_wqe0WhxlM1owxp1G2II40&e=>
Thanks, Donna, for your thoughts on this. The Board clearly committed in public sessions in AD and previously to providing minute-taking support, so this may in fact have resolved the staff support issue. If other staff support is needed, this needs to be explicitly specified by SSR2 (perhaps already done, I'm not sure?). I take your point about other RTs, but until we are dealing with explicitly stated concerns and not simply rumblings and grumblings, I'm personally loathe to take any action. Therefore I'm very keen to hear others' views so we can be sure that the full range of Councillors' views are captured. Best wishes, Heather On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote:
Thanks for the update Heather.
It’s somewhat discerning that other SO/AC leaders continue to have concerns about the SSR2, but are not willing to share publicly what these are. It makes me wonder whether adding more members to the team will actually address any of the concerns or whether we are just providing an interim solution.
I’ve been listening to some of the recordings of meetings in Abu Dhabi and it addition to the composition of the SSR2, there also seems to be some resourcing issues in terms of the provision of ICANN staff support. Do we know if this is an issue that is impacting the ability of the SSR2 to meet their published timelines?
If there are genuine concerns about the ability of the SSR2 to be a constructive team, the following blogs don’t reflect that:
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/an-update-from-the- second-security-stability-and-resiliency-of-the-domain-name- system-dns-review-team-ssr2
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/a-conversation-with-members-of-the-second- security-stability-and-resiliency-of-the-domain-name- system-dns-review-team-ssr2
Given the uncertainty that the SSR2 finds itself, and an admission by Chris Disspain in one of the public sessions in Abu Dhabi, that the Board and the community is in unchartered waters because there is no process for dealing with concerns that may arise about review teams, I wonder whether it makes sense to put the other review team efforts on hold until this is worked through. I recall that Susan and Stephanie did raise some concerns about the potential impact on the work of the RDS/WHOIS2 RT.
Donna
*From:* council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Heather Forrest *Sent:* Monday, November 13, 2017 5:53 PM *To:* GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [council] Fwd: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Dear Council colleagues,
An update on the status of SSR2 and the involvement of the SO/AC leaders.
We (SO/AC leaders) received the emails below from Denise and SSR2 with attached scoping document and skills matrix, and a request as to whether this meets our requirements to "unpause" their work. We met a few hours ago (our first call since ICANN60) to discuss.
My initial response to the SO/AC leaders was that I felt that we collectively were now placed in a difficult position by the Board, as it was the Board's requirements (the detail and extent of which are still only specified at a high level) that occasioned the "pause", and now we're being asked by SSR2 if their documentation meets the community's requirements. While I acknowledge that SO/AC leaders collectively took responsibility for re-starting SSR2 in our email of 2 Nov, in practice this is awkward, as we have somehow assumed the Board's (and/or SSAC's) concerns. My view on this was not shared by SSAC (logical, given their letter to Board re SSR2), nor by ccNSO, ALAC or RSSAC (GAC not present on the call)- it seems these communities have concerns about SSR2 but there is reluctance to document these formally.
Concerns were raised by other leaders about the group's ability to work together constructively. I haven't heard anything to this extent, so insisted that, if this is the case, it needs to be documented.
The proposed path forward, which I generally support provided that it is done in such a way as to preserve the integrity of SSR2, is to follow up on their skills matrix with specific questions about what SSR2 participants believe, if anything, the community can do (ie, add members to SSR2 to fill weaker skill areas) to facilitate their work.
We're looking at a next call in one week's time, in order to get back to SSR2 as quickly as possible.
Please take the skills matrix and scoping document back to your SGs and Cs for discussion. If your groups believe it is helpful or appropriate to provide input to SSR2, please do so directly.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Heather
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Denise Michel* <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org>
Dear SO & AC Chairs:
Please find attached a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective of the scope of this review, and a skill matrix developed and completed by a majority of the Team. As requested, the SSR2 is completing these requested items to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.”
We hope this meets your requirements regarding the Review Team’s perspective on the scope of this review and relevant, useful skills. The current Terms of Reference for SSR2’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found here <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_Terms-2Bof-2BReference-3Fpreview-3D_64076120_64948210_SSR2-2DTermsofReference-2DCLEAN-2520v4.0-2520ET.docx&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=D6jAOlMl7WgCrjuXi175p_rnexflPQ5B5owsPxh4u4w&e=>. Additional information on SSR2 activities, including the work plan can be found on the Review Team’s wiki <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_SSR2-2BReview&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=PZTu7CB4TvTi6KCOPr1RQya7i6HzfwK8ljoEMKfrueg&e=> .
Please let us know if you require anything further.
We’d appreciate confirmation of receipt of this email and of the 4 Nov. email (copy included below), as well as a response to our previous request for information regarding the Team’s “un-pausing” (see below).
Regards,
The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2)
*From: *<ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Denise Michel < denisemichel@fb.com> *Date: *Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 12:16 AM *To: *SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> *Cc: *SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> *Subject: *[Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Dear SO/AC Chairs:
As one of the co-chairs of the SSR2, I’ve been asked to share an informal update on the Review Team’s work, and a query.
The SSR2 met Friday 3 Nov., addressed scope and skills as directed, and then adjourned, since our work is “paused.” Specifically, the Review Team developed a skills matrix and a document clarifying SSR2’s scope/terms of reference. These drafts have been shared with all Review Team members for edits (not all participated in the 3 Nov. meeting), and we plan to finalize and deliver them to you next week. (Note that SSR2 operates by consensus and input from all Team members may necessitate a slight extension of this schedule, or not).
The SSR2 would appreciate receiving information from the chairs on how and when you will decide on “un-pausing” this review. As you can appreciate, the Review Team’s volunteers would like more certainty as to their schedules. SSR2 previously planned a January face-to-face drafting session for which time has been blocked on our calendars and travel arrangements have been made. Please advise if we should cancel these.
Please let us know if you need anything else from the Review Team (cc’d).
Best,
Denise
Denise Michel
*denisemichel@fb.com <denisemichel@fb.com>*
*From: *Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> *Date: *Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 7:29 PM *To: *Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> *Cc: *SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Eric Osterweil <eosterweil@verisign.com> *Subject: *Re: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Your interpretation is correct. The goal now is to unpause SSR2.
Please not that I do not have posting rights to the SSR2 list, so the moderated message must be released or forwarded by someone with posting rights.
Best, Patrik
On 2 Nov 2017, at 21:06, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Thanks for forwarding, Patrick.
Could the SO/AC Chairs please clarify the SSR2’s status tonight as the SSR2 is meeting tomorrow morning.
My quick read of this indicates that SSR2 is still “paused” except that the Team is to address “resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” That takes the work plan and other items off the table.
Thanks for clarifying.
Best
Denise
Denise Michel
Sent via phone
_____________________________ From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 7:42 PM Subject: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil@verisign.com>, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com>
STATEMENT FROM SO/AC CHAIRS ON THE SUSPENSION OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY REVIEW
The Chairs of ICANN’s Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs) acknowledge the 28 October 2017 announcement from the Board of Directors, pausing the work of the Security, Stability and Resiliency Review Team (SSR2-RT), and the Board's having tasked the SOs and ACs in sessions this week with addressing concerns raised by the Board, Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC), and the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC).
Collectively, we accept responsibility for getting SSR2-RT restarted as expeditiously as possible. During various sessions throughout ICANN60, our groups have met with the Board and/or members of SSR2-RT to hear their concerns. We intend to continue to consult with our respective communities, and each other, to assess and address issues relating to the scope, composition and participation, resource utilization, and overall work plan of the Review.
Additionally, the Board’s unilateral decision to suspend the work of a key accountability mechanism has raised questions that go to the independence of SSR2-RT, and specific reviews going forward. As a follow-on effort, we intend to examine the selection and scoping process for review teams, and develop a clear and predictable process for raising and addressing concerns about review teams. We also intend to carefully consider the Board's action, with a view to preventing similar instances in the future. We look forward to working collaboratively with the Board, SSR2-RT and the broader community on this task.
The SO/AC Chairs support the SSR2 RT meeting on Friday, 3 November 2017, and followup telephone conferences when needed. These are necessary so that the team can work on resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.
Finally, we wish to acknowledge the efforts of our colleagues on the SSR2-RT to date, and thank them for their continued commitment towards security, stability and resiliency.
Alan Greenberg (Chair ALAC) Patrik Fältström (Outgoing Chair SSAC) Rod Rasmussen (Incoming Chair SSAC) Katrina Sataki (Chair ccNSO) Thomas Schneider (Outgoing Chair GAC) Manal Ismail (Incoming Chair GAC) James Bladel (Outgoing Chair GNSO Council) Heather Forrest (Incoming Chair GNSO Council) Tripti Sinha(Co-Chair RSSAC) Brad Verd (Co-Chair RSSAC)
_______________________________________________ soac-chairs mailing list soac-chairs@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-chairs <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_soac-2Dchairs&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=o3Jg526lrPopCbRLqUeom_wqe0WhxlM1owxp1G2II40&e=>
Hello All, I agree with you Heather there is no need to suspend the other review teams. Especially since it is not very clear on why this team was suspended rather than tasked with the work that they did the last day of the meeting. It appears to me there has been one RT member complaining and his comments have held more weight than other RT members. I think the SO/ACs should review the work the RT did on scope and needs and reinstate the team. If there are any explicitly stated concerns then those should be addressed but as far as I know I agree with Heather's comment of "rumblings and grumblings". On another point, as a member of the RDS RT I am finding the metrics that ICANN staff provides in its Fact Sheet to be hard to understand and the stats do not correlate well. More information is needed than a few percentages and charts. Also for the RDS RT, the Board motion which includes a deadline for scope and terms of reference to be submitted to the Board provides a date that predates the first meeting of the RDS RT. The RT according to the Board resolution is required to adhere to a deadline of May 2017 but the team was formed in June 2017. I have made a request as a team member to publish a correction with a realistic date. The SSR2 RT Board motion indicates a date for the deadline that was only several weeks after they were formed. I think we have process issues that we need to work on and assure that we have accurate deadlines and statistics published. But our main goal is to get the SRR2 team back to work and we should pressure the other SO/AC's to agree to this. Best regards, Susan On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, Donna, for your thoughts on this.
The Board clearly committed in public sessions in AD and previously to providing minute-taking support, so this may in fact have resolved the staff support issue. If other staff support is needed, this needs to be explicitly specified by SSR2 (perhaps already done, I'm not sure?).
I take your point about other RTs, but until we are dealing with explicitly stated concerns and not simply rumblings and grumblings, I'm personally loathe to take any action. Therefore I'm very keen to hear others' views so we can be sure that the full range of Councillors' views are captured.
Best wishes,
Heather
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote:
Thanks for the update Heather.
It’s somewhat discerning that other SO/AC leaders continue to have concerns about the SSR2, but are not willing to share publicly what these are. It makes me wonder whether adding more members to the team will actually address any of the concerns or whether we are just providing an interim solution.
I’ve been listening to some of the recordings of meetings in Abu Dhabi and it addition to the composition of the SSR2, there also seems to be some resourcing issues in terms of the provision of ICANN staff support. Do we know if this is an issue that is impacting the ability of the SSR2 to meet their published timelines?
If there are genuine concerns about the ability of the SSR2 to be a constructive team, the following blogs don’t reflect that:
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/an-update-from-the-second- security-stability-and-resiliency-of-the-domain-name-system- dns-review-team-ssr2
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/a-conversation-with-members- of-the-second-security-stability-and-resiliency-of- the-domain-name-system-dns-review-team-ssr2
Given the uncertainty that the SSR2 finds itself, and an admission by Chris Disspain in one of the public sessions in Abu Dhabi, that the Board and the community is in unchartered waters because there is no process for dealing with concerns that may arise about review teams, I wonder whether it makes sense to put the other review team efforts on hold until this is worked through. I recall that Susan and Stephanie did raise some concerns about the potential impact on the work of the RDS/WHOIS2 RT.
Donna
*From:* council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Heather Forrest *Sent:* Monday, November 13, 2017 5:53 PM *To:* GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [council] Fwd: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Dear Council colleagues,
An update on the status of SSR2 and the involvement of the SO/AC leaders.
We (SO/AC leaders) received the emails below from Denise and SSR2 with attached scoping document and skills matrix, and a request as to whether this meets our requirements to "unpause" their work. We met a few hours ago (our first call since ICANN60) to discuss.
My initial response to the SO/AC leaders was that I felt that we collectively were now placed in a difficult position by the Board, as it was the Board's requirements (the detail and extent of which are still only specified at a high level) that occasioned the "pause", and now we're being asked by SSR2 if their documentation meets the community's requirements. While I acknowledge that SO/AC leaders collectively took responsibility for re-starting SSR2 in our email of 2 Nov, in practice this is awkward, as we have somehow assumed the Board's (and/or SSAC's) concerns. My view on this was not shared by SSAC (logical, given their letter to Board re SSR2), nor by ccNSO, ALAC or RSSAC (GAC not present on the call)- it seems these communities have concerns about SSR2 but there is reluctance to document these formally.
Concerns were raised by other leaders about the group's ability to work together constructively. I haven't heard anything to this extent, so insisted that, if this is the case, it needs to be documented.
The proposed path forward, which I generally support provided that it is done in such a way as to preserve the integrity of SSR2, is to follow up on their skills matrix with specific questions about what SSR2 participants believe, if anything, the community can do (ie, add members to SSR2 to fill weaker skill areas) to facilitate their work.
We're looking at a next call in one week's time, in order to get back to SSR2 as quickly as possible.
Please take the skills matrix and scoping document back to your SGs and Cs for discussion. If your groups believe it is helpful or appropriate to provide input to SSR2, please do so directly.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Heather
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Denise Michel* <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM Subject: Re: [soac-chairs] [Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> Cc: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org>
Dear SO & AC Chairs:
Please find attached a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective of the scope of this review, and a skill matrix developed and completed by a majority of the Team. As requested, the SSR2 is completing these requested items to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.”
We hope this meets your requirements regarding the Review Team’s perspective on the scope of this review and relevant, useful skills. The current Terms of Reference for SSR2’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found here <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_Terms-2Bof-2BReference-3Fpreview-3D_64076120_64948210_SSR2-2DTermsofReference-2DCLEAN-2520v4.0-2520ET.docx&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=D6jAOlMl7WgCrjuXi175p_rnexflPQ5B5owsPxh4u4w&e=>. Additional information on SSR2 activities, including the work plan can be found on the Review Team’s wiki <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_SSR_SSR2-2BReview&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=PZTu7CB4TvTi6KCOPr1RQya7i6HzfwK8ljoEMKfrueg&e=> .
Please let us know if you require anything further.
We’d appreciate confirmation of receipt of this email and of the 4 Nov. email (copy included below), as well as a response to our previous request for information regarding the Team’s “un-pausing” (see below).
Regards,
The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2)
*From: *<ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Denise Michel < denisemichel@fb.com> *Date: *Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 12:16 AM *To: *SO-AC Chairs List <soac-chairs@icann.org>, SO/AC Leadership List < soac-leaders@icann.org> *Cc: *SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> *Subject: *[Potential Spoof] Re: [Ssr2-review] Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Dear SO/AC Chairs:
As one of the co-chairs of the SSR2, I’ve been asked to share an informal update on the Review Team’s work, and a query.
The SSR2 met Friday 3 Nov., addressed scope and skills as directed, and then adjourned, since our work is “paused.” Specifically, the Review Team developed a skills matrix and a document clarifying SSR2’s scope/terms of reference. These drafts have been shared with all Review Team members for edits (not all participated in the 3 Nov. meeting), and we plan to finalize and deliver them to you next week. (Note that SSR2 operates by consensus and input from all Team members may necessitate a slight extension of this schedule, or not).
The SSR2 would appreciate receiving information from the chairs on how and when you will decide on “un-pausing” this review. As you can appreciate, the Review Team’s volunteers would like more certainty as to their schedules. SSR2 previously planned a January face-to-face drafting session for which time has been blocked on our calendars and travel arrangements have been made. Please advise if we should cancel these.
Please let us know if you need anything else from the Review Team (cc’d).
Best,
Denise
Denise Michel
*denisemichel@fb.com <denisemichel@fb.com>*
*From: *Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> *Date: *Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 7:29 PM *To: *Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> *Cc: *SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Eric Osterweil <eosterweil@verisign.com> *Subject: *Re: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review
Your interpretation is correct. The goal now is to unpause SSR2.
Please not that I do not have posting rights to the SSR2 list, so the moderated message must be released or forwarded by someone with posting rights.
Best, Patrik
On 2 Nov 2017, at 21:06, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Thanks for forwarding, Patrick.
Could the SO/AC Chairs please clarify the SSR2’s status tonight as the SSR2 is meeting tomorrow morning.
My quick read of this indicates that SSR2 is still “paused” except that the Team is to address “resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.” That takes the work plan and other items off the table.
Thanks for clarifying.
Best
Denise
Denise Michel
Sent via phone
_____________________________ From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 7:42 PM Subject: Statement from SO/AC Chairs on the suspension of the Security and Stability Review To: SO/AC Leadership List <soac-leaders@icann.org>, SO-AC Chairs List < soac-chairs@icann.org>, ICANN Board <icann-board@icann.org>, SSR2 < ssr2-review@icann.org>, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil@verisign.com>, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com>
STATEMENT FROM SO/AC CHAIRS ON THE SUSPENSION OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY REVIEW
The Chairs of ICANN’s Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs) acknowledge the 28 October 2017 announcement from the Board of Directors, pausing the work of the Security, Stability and Resiliency Review Team (SSR2-RT), and the Board's having tasked the SOs and ACs in sessions this week with addressing concerns raised by the Board, Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC), and the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC).
Collectively, we accept responsibility for getting SSR2-RT restarted as expeditiously as possible. During various sessions throughout ICANN60, our groups have met with the Board and/or members of SSR2-RT to hear their concerns. We intend to continue to consult with our respective communities, and each other, to assess and address issues relating to the scope, composition and participation, resource utilization, and overall work plan of the Review.
Additionally, the Board’s unilateral decision to suspend the work of a key accountability mechanism has raised questions that go to the independence of SSR2-RT, and specific reviews going forward. As a follow-on effort, we intend to examine the selection and scoping process for review teams, and develop a clear and predictable process for raising and addressing concerns about review teams. We also intend to carefully consider the Board's action, with a view to preventing similar instances in the future. We look forward to working collaboratively with the Board, SSR2-RT and the broader community on this task.
The SO/AC Chairs support the SSR2 RT meeting on Friday, 3 November 2017, and followup telephone conferences when needed. These are necessary so that the team can work on resolving the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope and skills.
Finally, we wish to acknowledge the efforts of our colleagues on the SSR2-RT to date, and thank them for their continued commitment towards security, stability and resiliency.
Alan Greenberg (Chair ALAC) Patrik Fältström (Outgoing Chair SSAC) Rod Rasmussen (Incoming Chair SSAC) Katrina Sataki (Chair ccNSO) Thomas Schneider (Outgoing Chair GAC) Manal Ismail (Incoming Chair GAC) James Bladel (Outgoing Chair GNSO Council) Heather Forrest (Incoming Chair GNSO Council) Tripti Sinha(Co-Chair RSSAC) Brad Verd (Co-Chair RSSAC)
_______________________________________________ soac-chairs mailing list soac-chairs@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-chairs <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_soac-2Dchairs&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=teDjgx9NjKInyfqJe2yKtAnkEYY3gT7Lot7vwNC3t2I&s=o3Jg526lrPopCbRLqUeom_wqe0WhxlM1owxp1G2II40&e=>
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
participants (5)
-
Austin, Donna -
Carlos Raul Gutierrez -
Heather Forrest -
Marika Konings -
Susan Kawaguchi