Hi Donna, Per the RPM PDP WG Co-Chairs, with respect to your questions you may find the recently updated attached timeline to be helpful.  It was sent to the RPM PDP on Friday, 31 August.  In addition, they note that they are planning a call with the SubPro PDP WG leaders and will include in that discussion the issue of possible dependencies between the two Working Groups. Best, Julie From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "Austin, Donna via council" <council@gnso.icann.org> Reply-To: "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date: Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 4:44 PM To: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com>, "BECKHAM, Brian" <brian.beckham@wipo.int> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] RE: RPM Working Group status report on its Council-approved data collection exercise Thanks Mary What’s the worst case scenario here? The explanation notes that the timeline is provided as a plausible, if aggressive, path. What are the variables that could compromise the Best Case timeline and are there any steps in place to mitigate timeline slippages. I appreciate that a solid plan has been developed for ensuring that the surveys are distributed to the intended recipients, but what happens if the desired response rate is not reached? Will that window be extended and if so, for how long? What flow-on effect would this have on the timeline? It seems that a lot of important issues are intended to be discussed and resolved around the ICANN meeting in Barcelona to be soon followed by various holiday seasons. Thanks Donna From: Mary Wong [mailto:mary.wong@icann.org] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 9:53 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; council@gnso.icann.org Cc: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com>; BECKHAM, Brian <brian.beckham@wipo.int>; Corwin, Philip <pcorwin@verisign.com> Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: RPM Working Group status report on its Council-approved data collection exercise Hello Donna and everyone, Here is some information that staff hopes addresses Donna’s question and provides useful context for the Council as you review this latest update on the data and metrics exercise you approved for the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPM) PDP Working Group. When the data request was submitted to the Council in September 2017, a detailed timeline was not provided as it was not possible at that early stage to have fully scoped the project. The request noted, however, that due to the need to collect extensive and relevant data, it was likely not possible for the Working Group to conclude its work on Phase One of the PDP in/by June 2018, Subsequently, and following the Council’s approval of the data request, a detailed timeline for issuing the mandatory Request for Proposal (RFP) in accordance with ICANN organization’s process for soliciting external vendors/contractors was developed. Initially, the idea was to have the survey vendor selected and announced by early May 2018 (following the close of the RFP process), the requisite surveys issued by mid-June, and initial results received by late July 2018. However, as the Working Group co-chairs’ report indicates, it turned out that extensive guidance from and meetings with the Working Group’s Data Sub Team was needed. The current aim is to have all the surveys issued by late August, and initial results received by mid/late September 2018. Please see the attached slide that shows the most current timeframe in which the Working Group is aiming to complete its Phase One work, including completing its review of the survey results from this data gathering exercise, as a “best case scenario”. Thanks and cheers Julie, Ariel & Mary From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 18:25 To: "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com>, "BECKHAM, Brian" <brian.beckham@wipo.int>, "Corwin, Philip" <pcorwin@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Ariel Liang <ariel.liang@icann.org>, Berry Cobb Mail <mail@berrycobb.com> Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: RPM Working Group status report on its Council-approved data collection exercise Hi Donna, Staff will provide the original timeline and updates. Best, Julie From: "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:37 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com>, "BECKHAM, Brian" <brian.beckham@wipo.int> Subject: [Ext] RE: RPM Working Group status report on its Council-approved data collection exercise Hi Julie Thank you for forwarding this to Council. Is it possible to provide the original proposed timeline for this data gathering exercise along with any revised timeline developed since. Donna From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2018 3:59 PM To: council@gnso.icann.org Cc: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com>; BECKHAM, Brian <brian.beckham@wipo.int> Subject: [council] RPM Working Group status report on its Council-approved data collection exercise Dear Councilors, Please find attached the report from the RPM Review PDP Working Group, summarizing where things stand with the extensive data collection effort that the Council approved in September 2017, for the Sunrise and Trademark Claims RPMs. This report summarizes the activities as of August 2018. Please let staff or the current Working Group chairs (Brian Beckham, Kathy Kleiman, and Phil Corwin, cc’d on this email) know if you have any questions or comments. Thank you! Best, Mary, Ariel, Berry, and Julie