For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors, Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by COB Friday, 26 March: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY.... Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors: Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow. We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin
Dear Councilors, Thank you to those who have added comments to the draft SSAD letter to the Board<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>. During today’s Public Board Meeting, the Board passed a motion directing ICANN org to initiate the ODP for the SSAD and provided additional information on the SSAD ODP and what it will entail. Please find a link to the session, which will include the recording as soon as available: https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE. If you were unable to attend the session, it may be worth reviewing the recording to determine if the letter/talking points require any editing in light of the Board’s comments. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 6:20 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by COB Friday, 26 March: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY.... Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors: Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow. We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin
Dear Councilors, Further to Caitlin's email below, I have developed the attached document to try to see how the ODP scope correlates to the exchange between the Council and the Board to date and the draft letter to the Board that is still in progress. As you will see from these tables, most of the questions raised or to be raised by the Council seem somehow covered in the ODP scope but notably the Council-requested cost-benefit analysis is missing. So it seems to me we should reconsider whether the letter is still needed or whether we should just focus on talking points for our upcoming meeting with the Board. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Sent At:2021 Mar. 26 (Fri.) 09:44 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Thank you to those who have added comments to the draft SSAD letter to the Board. During today’s Public Board Meeting, the Board passed a motion directing ICANN org to initiate the ODP for the SSAD and provided additional information on the SSAD ODP and what it will entail. Please find a link to the session, which will include the recording as soon as available: https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE. If you were unable to attend the session, it may be worth reviewing the recording to determine if the letter/talking points require any editing in light of the Board’s comments. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 6:20 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by COB Friday, 26 March: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY.... Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors: Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow. We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin
Hi everyone, As you would recall, at our last Council call we agreed to try and develop a response letter to the board on the SSAD prior to our call on April 1st. In light of the discussion on this letter and the board’s vote, sending the letter at this point would appear redundant in light of the overlap with the ODP scoping document, and difficult to agree on anyway given the timeline. We discussed this within the leadership and we suggest to approach our meeting with the questions drew out of the letter which Pam provided a first draft of. The goal would essentially be the same as the letter without losing the work that was put into it ie a) confirm our understanding (now consolidated with the ODP scoping document) and b) raise questions that wouldn’t seem to be addressed (seem to be missing in the scoping document). It is a bit less formal than the intended letter but would avoid appearing lagging being. Please have a look at the document that Pam circulated and review. Thanks. Regards, Philippe From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Pam Little via council Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 6:59 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to Caitlin's email below, I have developed the attached document to try to see how the ODP scope correlates to the exchange between the Council and the Board to date and the draft letter to the Board that is still in progress. As you will see from these tables, most of the questions raised or to be raised by the Council seem somehow covered in the ODP scope but notably the Council-requested cost-benefit analysis is missing. So it seems to me we should reconsider whether the letter is still needed or whether we should just focus on talking points for our upcoming meeting with the Board. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Sent At:2021 Mar. 26 (Fri.) 09:44 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Thank you to those who have added comments to the draft SSAD letter to the Board<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>. During today’s Public Board Meeting, the Board passed a motion directing ICANN org to initiate the ODP for the SSAD and provided additional information on the SSAD ODP and what it will entail. Please find a link to the session, which will include the recording as soon as available: https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE. If you were unable to attend the session, it may be worth reviewing the recording to determine if the letter/talking points require any editing in light of the Board’s comments. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 6:20 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by COB Friday, 26 March: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY.... Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors: Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow. We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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.
Dear Philippe: Many thanks to Pam for producing the referral document. Having reviewed Pam's comparative side-by-side analysis, I tend to agree that the letter might be redundant. As Pam suggested, it could still be a collector for Council's talking points and so useful downstream. Hold and repurpose. Best, Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:17 AM philippe.fouquart--- via council < council@gnso.icann.org> wrote:
Hi everyone,
As you would recall, at our last Council call we agreed to try and develop a response letter to the board on the SSAD prior to our call on April 1st.
In light of the discussion on this letter and the board’s vote, sending the letter at this point would appear redundant in light of the overlap with the ODP scoping document, and difficult to agree on anyway given the timeline.
We discussed this within the leadership and we suggest to approach our meeting with the questions drew out of the letter which Pam provided a first draft of. The goal would essentially be the same as the letter without losing the work that was put into it ie
a) confirm our understanding (now consolidated with the ODP scoping document) and
b) raise questions that wouldn’t seem to be addressed (seem to be missing in the scoping document).
It is a bit less formal than the intended letter but would avoid appearing lagging being. Please have a look at the document that Pam circulated and review.
Thanks.
Regards,
Philippe
*From:* council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Pam Little via council *Sent:* Friday, March 26, 2021 6:59 AM *To:* council@gnso.icann.org; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org
*Subject:* Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors,
Further to Caitlin's email below, I have developed the attached document to try to see how the ODP scope correlates to the exchange between the Council and the Board to date and the draft letter to the Board that is still in progress.
As you will see from these tables, most of the questions raised or to be raised by the Council seem somehow covered in the ODP scope but notably the Council-requested cost-benefit analysis is missing. So it seems to me we should reconsider whether the letter is still needed or whether we should just focus on talking points for our upcoming meeting with the Board.
Kind regards,
Pam
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sender:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org>
Sent At:2021 Mar. 26 (Fri.) 09:44
Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors,
Thank you to those who have added comments to the draft SSAD letter to the Board <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>.
During today’s Public Board Meeting, the Board passed a motion directing ICANN org to initiate the ODP for the SSAD and provided additional information on the SSAD ODP and what it will entail. Please find a link to the session, which will include the recording as soon as available: https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1& uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE.
If you were unable to attend the session, it may be worth reviewing the recording to determine if the letter/talking points require any editing in light of the Board’s comments.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Caitlin
*From: *Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> *Date: *Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 6:20 PM *To: *"council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors,
Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by *COB Friday, 26 March*: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY... .
Thank you.
Best regards,
Caitlin
*From: *Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> *Date: *Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM *To: *"council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors:
Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow.
We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Caitlin
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Councilors, As a follow-up to Philippe's email, please find attached a list of proposed questions for our meeting with the Board tomorrow. These questions are intended to cover Council input (as set out in our January letter to the Board and the draft letter) that seem not have been addressed in the ODP scoping document or seeking further clarification on some aspects of the ODP scope. Another topic that was suggested to be included in our meeting with the Board is SubPro. So if you have any specific questions for the Board on this topic, it would be good if you could share them on the list before the meeting. Bear in mind our meeting with the Board is for one hour so we may not have time to all questions. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Sent At:2021 Mar. 31 (Wed.) 09:24 Recipient:Fouquart <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc:PAMELALITTLE <pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Philippe: Many thanks to Pam for producing the referral document. Having reviewed Pam's comparative side-by-side analysis, I tend to agree that the letter might be redundant. As Pam suggested, it could still be a collector for Council's talking points and so useful downstream. Hold and repurpose. Best, Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:17 AM philippe.fouquart--- via council <council@gnso.icann.org> wrote: Hi everyone, As you would recall, at our last Council call we agreed to try and develop a response letter to the board on the SSAD prior to our call on April 1st. In light of the discussion on this letter and the board’s vote, sending the letter at this point would appear redundant in light of the overlap with the ODP scoping document, and difficult to agree on anyway given the timeline. We discussed this within the leadership and we suggest to approach our meeting with the questions drew out of the letter which Pam provided a first draft of. The goal would essentially be the same as the letter without losing the work that was put into it ie a) confirm our understanding (now consolidated with the ODP scoping document) and b) raise questions that wouldn’t seem to be addressed (seem to be missing in the scoping document). It is a bit less formal than the intended letter but would avoid appearing lagging being. Please have a look at the document that Pam circulated and review. Thanks. Regards, Philippe From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Pam Little via council Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 6:59 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to Caitlin's email below, I have developed the attached document to try to see how the ODP scope correlates to the exchange between the Council and the Board to date and the draft letter to the Board that is still in progress. As you will see from these tables, most of the questions raised or to be raised by the Council seem somehow covered in the ODP scope but notably the Council-requested cost-benefit analysis is missing. So it seems to me we should reconsider whether the letter is still needed or whether we should just focus on talking points for our upcoming meeting with the Board. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Sent At:2021 Mar. 26 (Fri.) 09:44 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Thank you to those who have added comments to the draft SSAD letter to the Board. During today’s Public Board Meeting, the Board passed a motion directing ICANN org to initiate the ODP for the SSAD and provided additional information on the SSAD ODP and what it will entail. Please find a link to the session, which will include the recording as soon as available: https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE. If you were unable to attend the session, it may be worth reviewing the recording to determine if the letter/talking points require any editing in light of the Board’s comments. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 6:20 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by COB Friday, 26 March: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY.... Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors: Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow. We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you Pam. I think the proposed questions for the Board address the gaps between what Council has sought to date and what the ODP Scoping Document appears to propose. Regards Tom From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Pam Little via council <council@gnso.icann.org> Date: Thursday, 1 April 2021 at 8:31 am To: council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, As a follow-up to Philippe's email, please find attached a list of proposed questions for our meeting with the Board tomorrow. These questions are intended to cover Council input (as set out in our January letter to the Board and the draft letter) that seem not have been addressed in the ODP scoping document or seeking further clarification on some aspects of the ODP scope. Another topic that was suggested to be included in our meeting with the Board is SubPro. So if you have any specific questions for the Board on this topic, it would be good if you could share them on the list before the meeting. Bear in mind our meeting with the Board is for one hour so we may not have time to all questions. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Sent At:2021 Mar. 31 (Wed.) 09:24 Recipient:Fouquart <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc:PAMELALITTLE <pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Philippe: Many thanks to Pam for producing the referral document. Having reviewed Pam's comparative side-by-side analysis, I tend to agree that the letter might be redundant. As Pam suggested, it could still be a collector for Council's talking points and so useful downstream. Hold and repurpose. Best, Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:17 AM philippe.fouquart--- via council <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> wrote: Hi everyone, As you would recall, at our last Council call we agreed to try and develop a response letter to the board on the SSAD prior to our call on April 1st. In light of the discussion on this letter and the board’s vote, sending the letter at this point would appear redundant in light of the overlap with the ODP scoping document, and difficult to agree on anyway given the timeline. We discussed this within the leadership and we suggest to approach our meeting with the questions drew out of the letter which Pam provided a first draft of. The goal would essentially be the same as the letter without losing the work that was put into it ie a) confirm our understanding (now consolidated with the ODP scoping document) and b) raise questions that wouldn’t seem to be addressed (seem to be missing in the scoping document). It is a bit less formal than the intended letter but would avoid appearing lagging being. Please have a look at the document that Pam circulated and review. Thanks. Regards, Philippe From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>] On Behalf Of Pam Little via council Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 6:59 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to Caitlin's email below, I have developed the attached document to try to see how the ODP scope correlates to the exchange between the Council and the Board to date and the draft letter to the Board that is still in progress. As you will see from these tables, most of the questions raised or to be raised by the Council seem somehow covered in the ODP scope but notably the Council-requested cost-benefit analysis is missing. So it seems to me we should reconsider whether the letter is still needed or whether we should just focus on talking points for our upcoming meeting with the Board. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Sender%3Acouncil@gnso.icann.org> <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Sent At:2021 Mar. 26 (Fri.) 09:44 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Recipient%3Acouncil@gnso.icann.org> <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Thank you to those who have added comments to the draft SSAD letter to the Board<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>. During today’s Public Board Meeting, the Board passed a motion directing ICANN org to initiate the ODP for the SSAD and provided additional information on the SSAD ODP and what it will entail. Please find a link to the session, which will include the recording as soon as available: https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE. If you were unable to attend the session, it may be worth reviewing the recording to determine if the letter/talking points require any editing in light of the Board’s comments. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 6:20 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by COB Friday, 26 March: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY.... Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors: Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow. We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
My thoughts: I think “Why so long?” will not get us to answers we desire, i.e., a discussion that will facilitate the timely implementation of consensus-backed policies. I would go back to our goals as we set them out when this dialogue started: 1. Can the cost-benefit analysis requested by the council be conducted in parallel with the ODP? To us, this makes sense in that a cost-benefit analysis might lead ICANN to find a more cost-effective way (e.g., a phased implementation) to implement the process. 2. How does the Board intend to use the cost-benefit analysis in its decision making, i.e., to find that the SSAD implementation is or is not in the interests of ICANN, or to turn back the issue to the GNSO? 3. Does the six-month ODP forecasted for the SSAD recommendation portend a new practice of tolling implementation while the ODPs are conducted? Or can some implementation steps occur in parallel (when it makes sense) in order to better achieve ICANN’s mission to operate at speeds responsive to the needs of the DNS? (Obviously, this point applies to PDPs coming down the pike.) 4. Will the Board consider rejecting the SSAD recommendations based on the letter received from the IPC? If not, what is the effect of that letter? I don’t think we should raise the “opportunity costs” issue. To me, ICANN should be managing these implementation efforts in parallel and staff them according. I.e., they should be managed according to our processes as they roll off the production line, and not delayed and managed by priority. In any event, I think we should go back to our original request for a cost-benefit analysis and attempt to avoid having that pushed out for six months. Thanks for letting me express these thoughts. Kurt
On Mar 31, 2021, at 7:45 PM, Tom Dale via council <council@gnso.icann.org> wrote:
Thank you Pam.
I think the proposed questions for the Board address the gaps between what Council has sought to date and what the ODP Scoping Document appears to propose.
Regards
Tom
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Pam Little via council <council@gnso.icann.org> Date: Thursday, 1 April 2021 at 8:31 am To: council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors,
As a follow-up to Philippe's email, please find attached a list of proposed questions for our meeting with the Board tomorrow. These questions are intended to cover Council input (as set out in our January letter to the Board and the draft letter) that seem not have been addressed in the ODP scoping document or seeking further clarification on some aspects of the ODP scope.
Another topic that was suggested to be included in our meeting with the Board is SubPro. So if you have any specific questions for the Board on this topic, it would be good if you could share them on the list before the meeting.
Bear in mind our meeting with the Board is for one hour so we may not have time to all questions.
Kind regards,
Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Sent At:2021 Mar. 31 (Wed.) 09:24 Recipient:Fouquart <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc:PAMELALITTLE <pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Philippe: Many thanks to Pam for producing the referral document.
Having reviewed Pam's comparative side-by-side analysis, I tend to agree that the letter might be redundant. As Pam suggested, it could still be a collector for Council's talking points and so useful downstream.
Hold and repurpose.
Best, Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:17 AM philippe.fouquart--- via council <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> wrote: Hi everyone,
As you would recall, at our last Council call we agreed to try and develop a response letter to the board on the SSAD prior to our call on April 1st.
In light of the discussion on this letter and the board’s vote, sending the letter at this point would appear redundant in light of the overlap with the ODP scoping document, and difficult to agree on anyway given the timeline.
We discussed this within the leadership and we suggest to approach our meeting with the questions drew out of the letter which Pam provided a first draft of. The goal would essentially be the same as the letter without losing the work that was put into it ie a) confirm our understanding (now consolidated with the ODP scoping document) and b) raise questions that wouldn’t seem to be addressed (seem to be missing in the scoping document).
It is a bit less formal than the intended letter but would avoid appearing lagging being. Please have a look at the document that Pam circulated and review.
Thanks. Regards, Philippe
From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>] On Behalf Of Pam Little via council Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 6:59 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org <mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors,
Further to Caitlin's email below, I have developed the attached document to try to see how the ODP scope correlates to the exchange between the Council and the Board to date and the draft letter to the Board that is still in progress.
As you will see from these tables, most of the questions raised or to be raised by the Council seem somehow covered in the ODP scope but notably the Council-requested cost-benefit analysis is missing. So it seems to me we should reconsider whether the letter is still needed or whether we should just focus on talking points for our upcoming meeting with the Board.
Kind regards,
Pam
------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:Sender%3Acouncil@gnso.icann.org> <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Sent At:2021 Mar. 26 (Fri.) 09:44 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:Recipient%3Acouncil@gnso.icann.org> <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors,
Thank you to those who have added comments to the draft SSAD letter to the Board <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>.
During today’s Public Board Meeting, the Board passed a motion directing ICANN org to initiate the ODP for the SSAD and provided additional information on the SSAD ODP and what it will entail. Please find a link to the session, which will include the recording as soon as available:https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE <https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE>.
If you were unable to attend the session, it may be worth reviewing the recording to determine if the letter/talking points require any editing in light of the Board’s comments.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Caitlin
From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org <mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 6:20 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors,
Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by COB Friday, 26 March: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Caitlin
From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org <mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter
Dear Councilors:
Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY...>, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda fortomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow.
We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Caitlin
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Kurt, Thank you for sharing these thoughts. Opportunity cost was one of the the must-covered aspects in our letter to the Board https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/fouquart-to-botterman-i.... I believe it is worth raising it, not only for consistency but also because there is so much going on that the Council and the community are struggling to keep up and it seems to me ICANN Board might also be struggling with all the issues in front of them. Something has to give. With regard to the "why so long" question. It is simply another way of expressing our concern that six months is too long. With regard to the idea of a cost-benefit analysis in parallel with the ODP, I would invite you to raise this tomorrow but I very much doubt that will happen. It seems to me ICANN has made up its mind to conduct the ODP, in response to the Council's original request for a cost-benefit analysis. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Kurt Pritz <kurt@kjpritz.com> Sent At:2021 Apr. 1 (Thu.) 14:30 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org>; PAMELALITTLE <pam.little@alibaba-inc.com> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter My thoughts: I think “Why so long?” will not get us to answers we desire, i.e., a discussion that will facilitate the timely implementation of consensus-backed policies. I would go back to our goals as we set them out when this dialogue started: 1. Can the cost-benefit analysis requested by the council be conducted in parallel with the ODP? To us, this makes sense in that a cost-benefit analysis might lead ICANN to find a more cost-effective way (e.g., a phased implementation) to implement the process. 2. How does the Board intend to use the cost-benefit analysis in its decision making, i.e., to find that the SSAD implementation is or is not in the interests of ICANN, or to turn back the issue to the GNSO? 3. Does the six-month ODP forecasted for the SSAD recommendation portend a new practice of tolling implementation while the ODPs are conducted? Or can some implementation steps occur in parallel (when it makes sense) in order to better achieve ICANN’s mission to operate at speeds responsive to the needs of the DNS? (Obviously, this point applies to PDPs coming down the pike.) 4. Will the Board consider rejecting the SSAD recommendations based on the letter received from the IPC? If not, what is the effect of that letter? I don’t think we should raise the “opportunity costs” issue. To me, ICANN should be managing these implementation efforts in parallel and staff them according. I.e., they should be managed according to our processes as they roll off the production line, and not delayed and managed by priority. In any event, I think we should go back to our original request for a cost-benefit analysis and attempt to avoid having that pushed out for six months. Thanks for letting me express these thoughts. Kurt On Mar 31, 2021, at 7:45 PM, Tom Dale via council <council@gnso.icann.org> wrote: Thank you Pam. I think the proposed questions for the Board address the gaps between what Council has sought to date and what the ODP Scoping Document appears to propose. Regards Tom From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Pam Little via council <council@gnso.icann.org> Date: Thursday, 1 April 2021 at 8:31 am To: council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, As a follow-up to Philippe's email, please find attached a list of proposed questions for our meeting with the Board tomorrow. These questions are intended to cover Council input (as set out in our January letter to the Board and the draft letter) that seem not have been addressed in the ODP scoping document or seeking further clarification on some aspects of the ODP scope. Another topic that was suggested to be included in our meeting with the Board is SubPro. So if you have any specific questions for the Board on this topic, it would be good if you could share them on the list before the meeting. Bear in mind our meeting with the Board is for one hour so we may not have time to all questions. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Sent At:2021 Mar. 31 (Wed.) 09:24 Recipient:Fouquart <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc:PAMELALITTLE <pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Philippe: Many thanks to Pam for producing the referral document. Having reviewed Pam's comparative side-by-side analysis, I tend to agree that the letter might be redundant. As Pam suggested, it could still be a collector for Council's talking points and so useful downstream. Hold and repurpose. Best, Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:17 AM philippe.fouquart--- via council <council@gnso.icann.org> wrote: Hi everyone, As you would recall, at our last Council call we agreed to try and develop a response letter to the board on the SSAD prior to our call on April 1st. In light of the discussion on this letter and the board’s vote, sending the letter at this point would appear redundant in light of the overlap with the ODP scoping document, and difficult to agree on anyway given the timeline. We discussed this within the leadership and we suggest to approach our meeting with the questions drew out of the letter which Pam provided a first draft of. The goal would essentially be the same as the letter without losing the work that was put into it ie a) confirm our understanding (now consolidated with the ODP scoping document) and b) raise questions that wouldn’t seem to be addressed (seem to be missing in the scoping document). It is a bit less formal than the intended letter but would avoid appearing lagging being. Please have a look at the document that Pam circulated and review. Thanks. Regards, Philippe From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Pam Little via council Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 6:59 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to Caitlin's email below, I have developed the attached document to try to see how the ODP scope correlates to the exchange between the Council and the Board to date and the draft letter to the Board that is still in progress. As you will see from these tables, most of the questions raised or to be raised by the Council seem somehow covered in the ODP scope but notably the Council-requested cost-benefit analysis is missing. So it seems to me we should reconsider whether the letter is still needed or whether we should just focus on talking points for our upcoming meeting with the Board. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Sent At:2021 Mar. 26 (Fri.) 09:44 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject:Re: [council] For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Thank you to those who have added comments to the draft SSAD letter to the Board. During today’s Public Board Meeting, the Board passed a motion directing ICANN org to initiate the ODP for the SSAD and provided additional information on the SSAD ODP and what it will entail. Please find a link to the session, which will include the recording as soon as available:https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/stTLvWoo7CtGti8du#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE. If you were unable to attend the session, it may be worth reviewing the recording to determine if the letter/talking points require any editing in light of the Board’s comments. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 6:20 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: For your review: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors, Further to the discussion from today’s meeting, please provide feedback to the draft SSAD letter to the Board by COB Friday, 26 March: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YjR-YsjqRSTnU0a_bbG3zXUwpeJ7g6cO1kIRudrY.... Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin From: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 3:36 PM To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Council SSAD Small Team draft letter Dear Councilors: Following the Council's recent engagement with the Board regarding the SSAD consultation, the SSAD Small Team worked together to draft a letter, confirming the outcomes of the meeting and posing additional questions for the Board's consideration. The letter still has several comments and proposed edits, which have been left in for the sake of transparency (since all commenters may not have had an opportunity to review the most recent edits). For ease of readability, you may wish to review the draft in "viewing" mode to avoid the array of colors. This letter is on the agenda fortomorrow's meeting, and Council leadership will go over it in greater detail tomorrow. We request that you do not make any additional changes to the Google Doc at this time; instead, please express concerns or provide additional comments via the mailing list. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (6)
-
Caitlin Tubergen -
Carlton Samuels -
Kurt Pritz -
Pam Little -
philippe.fouquart＠orange.com -
Tom Dale