April 2019 - GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT

Actions & Notes: GNSO PDP 3.0 Small Team Meeting 29 April 13:00 UTC
by Ariel Liang April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Dear All, Please find below the action items and notes captured during the small team call on Monday, 29 April at 13:00 UTC. Staff has post to the wiki space the action items and notes. Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording and chat room records, which are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/QoGGBg Best Regards, Ariel Ariel Xinyue Liang GNSO Policy Support Specialist Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) == ACTION ITEMS For Small Team: - Small Team to dedicate the next meeting to discuss Improvement #11 the questions posted by Berry in his email. - Small Team to continue following up on the discussion of Improvement #9 and #2 via SLACK. For Staff: - Staff to further investigate ICANN’s Conflict of Interest Policy and its applicability to ICANN community members. [DONE – ICANN org’s Conflict of Interest policy is not applicable to ICANN community members] - Staff to incorporate suggestions from the small group and send the updated document for Improvement #1 to the Ombudsman and PDP leadership (including Kurt) for input. Staff to develop the cover note in consultation with Rafik and Pam. - Staff to update the document for Improvement #14 incorporating input from the small team. - Staff to confirm with Rafik and schedule the next meeting on 13 May at 13:00-14:00 UTC NOTES 1. Welcome and roll call 2. Agreement on Improvement #1 and #14 a. #1 - Minor changes proposed from Elsa in SLACK channel. - Is the statement of participation going to be a fixed, standard document for all WGs? Or does a WG have the flexibility to change/modify the statement of participation? It should be one standard document as a baseline to ensure clarity and harmony. Only in rare cases, additional items can be added to the document. - Should we add the language of “bottom up” and “multi-stakeholder model” in the statement of participation? Maybe not, as this language is mentioned in other “higher level” binding documents (e.g., ESB). - Perhaps replace “adhering to ICANN’s Conflict of Interest Policy” with “updating Statement of Interest”? There does not seem to be a Conflict of Interest Policy targeting community members. - ACTION ITEM: Staff to further investigate ICANN’s Conflict of Interest Policy and its applicability to ICANN community members. - ACTION ITEM: Staff to incorporate suggestions from the small group and send the updated document to the Ombudsman and PDP leadership (including Kurt) for input. Staff to develop the cover note in consultation with Rafik and Pam. b. #14 - What is the aim of improvement? Should it be reworded? - This document is prepared to evaluate the data request. However, the language of the recommendation also concerns with charter template and PDP termination. These three purposes should not be lumped together. - The goal of the improvement needs to be clarified. It should just focus on the goal regarding clarifying the criteria for evaluating data request. - Many elements that Elsa mentioned are already identified in the GNSO Operating Procedure. The small group can review the existing language of the Operating Procedure and see if it’s fit for those purposes (e.g., charter drafting, PDP termination) - ACTION ITEM: Staff to update the document incorporating input from the small team. 3. Discussion of next topics a. #11 - This improvement is more about enforcing deadlines and ensuring work is broken into bite size pieces. - CCWG-Accountability had prior experience with using factsheet as a communication/project management tool for the community to track the activity of the group. The EPDP Team has been using a similar tool. - The intent of the Improvement #11 is not so much about the fact sheet, but more about teasing out the key components of the fact sheet to be leveraged by the GNSO Council for facilitating the management of the PDPs on a higher level. - What is missing on the fact sheet is the status of the project, which takes us to our current project list. The current project list aligns a project with the various phases of a PDP. But not all GNSO projects align with PDP phases (e.g., non-PDP project). - The prototype helps provide the visibly to the status condition (e.g., on target, at risk, in trouble) and progress, and includes the rationale. - Question 1: Do we need to create a single template (a “thin” version) for a project that will start/just started? - Question 2: How to deal with project priority? - Question 3: How to deal with the project tracking when it is in the implementation phase? The policy department does not own the policy implementation, and there is a challenge of creating duplicative project list. Should we link out to the project list produced by the GDD? - Question 4: Who owns the project list and is responsible for updating it? - ACTION ITEM: Small Team to dedicate the next meeting to discuss the questions posted by Berry in his email. b. #9 - ACTION ITEM: Small Team to continue following up on #9 via SLACK. c. #2 - ACTION ITEM: Small Team to continue following up on #2 via SLACK. 4. AOB - ACTION ITEM: Staff to confirm with Rafik and schedule the next meeting on 13 May at 13:00-14:00 UTC.

1 0

Attendance and recording PDP3.0 call / Monday, 29 April 2019 at 13:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Dear all, Please find attached the attendance and chat content, and below the Zoom recording of the PDP3.0 call on Monday, 29 April 2019 at 13:00 UTC . Zoom recording: https://icann.zoom.us/recording/share/5cEjFbKyN2mQLzaHJ5QGmsQ0ypxLKYdLolW1T… Thank you! Nathalie

1 0

PLEASE READ Re: Proposed Agenda GNSO PDP 3.0
by Pam Little April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Apologies to you all. I may not be able to join the call because my telco provider will be carrying out some scheduled network maintenance work tonight when our call is on. When Steve asked me about leading this call, I completely forgot about the prior email notice I received from the telco provider until today. I will endeavour to join the call if I have connectivity. Otherwise, could Steve or one of the Councilors please lead the call? Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb(a)icann.org> Sent At:2019 Apr. 27 (Sat.) 09:24 Recipient:gnso-pdp3dot0-dt@icann.org <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt(a)icann.org> Subject:Re: [GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT] Proposed Agenda GNSO PDP 3.0 Hi All, In preparation for our next PDP3.0 session, please review the following. Apologies for the lengthy email. As you will see by the actions under Recommendation #11, there is reference to “Adapt Factsheet” to help with “Enforcing Deadlines.” It’s a bit misplaced to note that the Factsheet will directly help solve this issue. As part of our meeting on Monday, I will give a quick demonstration of the Factsheet. In short, while it has some limited Project Management components, it’s mostly built to be a summary communications tool and to help manage an allocation of funds and subsequent expenses. This was first established in the CCWG Accountability and now used as a standard within the MSSI team for reviews. As for the GNSO, our first use of this was for the EPDP Phase 1 and will be used again for Phase 2 as these were the first projects where funds were specifically allocated for a PDP. The above Factsheet is what lead me to create the prototype for the project list, which is a better tool for the Council to manage deadlines. What we’ve been missing with the current project list is a mechanism to quantitatively provide a realistic status of where a given project stands. In the current list, you may have noticed an initial but quick version based on Status and Condition (both of which were leveraged from an internal legacy project management tool). You may have also seen these status conditions used on the ICANN.org projects page. Current Projects List: https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project. This current project list work product is organized based on the high-level PDP phases. As you can see by the summary diagram, the process moves from left to right, starting with Issue Identification through to Implementation. After the summary page, the project list moves top to down following the same phases as identified in the summary diagram. I’m hopeful we can maintain this structure on the new project list (https://gnsocouncilsmallteam.slack.com/files/UH2Q3QA80/FHHNKMY69/gnso_proje…) I will speak more to this prototype on our next call. The most notable changes are to quantify activity, especially a better demonstration of duration on the project. But most importantly is the section about project status. The bottom right section of the prototype is an attempt to migrate away from redlines of the project list. My thought is to better document: What was done What we are doing What we will do To not make this email any longer, I would like the team to consider the following questions related to the prototype: Not all projects on the projects list will look as complete as the prototype. For example projects not yet started but in the pipeline will have very little content and almost an empty shell. Do we create a “thin version” vs. the “thick” version of the prototype? What do we want to do about priority, if anything? I’ve not yet included a priority field in the prototype, but there has been lots of discussion in the community about priority of projects. We know we’re running well above 100% capacity. Do priority assignments help to park new or lesser priority projects until bandwidth is freed? How do we handle projects that become owned by GDD during Implementation (stage 7)? While the GNSO needs to be informed about the implementation of projects, Policy does not own the delivery. Is it worth keeping this same design, or would it be better to link to a set of status reports maintained by GDD outside of the projects list? Who should own project status designation and/or input into a designation change (Staff, WG Leadership, Liaison, or all)? How does this compliment a PCR (Project Change Request) of a WG when they can’t deliver to the agreed date? Do we somehow integrate Council Action Items better into the project list? https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items Lastly, I will speak a bit to a longer term vision to migrate the project list away from MS Word to align with the projects loaded within WG Enrollment & Management tool. This capability (if it will work) will not be possible until 2020. I hope you find this somewhat helpful. If not, I’m happy to explain in more detail on the call and afterwards. Thank you. B GNSO Policy Consultant @berrycobbb From: GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 10:03 PM To: "gnso-pdp3dot0-dt(a)icann.org" <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt(a)icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT] Proposed Agenda GNSO PDP 3.0 Hello Team, Below, please find the proposed agenda for the PDP 3.0 Small Team Meeting on Monday 29 April at 13:00 UTC. As suggested, we have tried to make the agenda a little less ambitious. Note, Pam will lead the call on Rafik’s behalf. Welcome and roll call Agreement on next steps for implementation #1. (Terms of participation for WG members) and #14. (flexibility of PDP for data gathering, chartering, termination) Discussion of next topics: #11. (Enforce deadlines and ensure bite size pieces): Adapt fact sheet that is being used for EPDP Team to template so it can also be used for other efforts (staff is exploring possible integration with CRM / PM tools). Comments or suggestions on the draft? #9. Provide further guidance for sections 3.6 and clarification of section 3.7 (Appeal Process) (Standard Methodology for decision making): Develop briefing document as well as slides to explain concept of “consensus” in the PDP. Discussion on the draft. Further changes needed before turning into a slide deck? #2. Consider alternatives to open WG model: Prepare a comparison table for the proposed Working Group models, which could include several factors: membership eligibility, operating procedures, decision-making, communicating decision-making, urgency/timing (e.g., prioritization). Consider creating pros/cons as well. (Action item coming out of Council SPS 2019). Discussion on draft. AOB If you have any questions or suggested changes, please let me know. Best, Steve Steven Chan Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Office Telephone: +1.310.301.5800 Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ http://gnso.icann.org/en/

3 2

Proposed Agenda GNSO PDP 3.0
by Steve Chan April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hello Team, Below, please find the proposed agenda for the PDP 3.0 Small Team Meeting on Monday 29 April at 13:00 UTC. As suggested, we have tried to make the agenda a little less ambitious. Note, Pam will lead the call on Rafik’s behalf. Welcome and roll call Agreement on next steps for implementation #1. (Terms of participation for WG members) and #14. (flexibility of PDP for data gathering, chartering, termination) Discussion of next topics: #11. (Enforce deadlines and ensure bite size pieces): Adapt fact sheet that is being used for EPDP Team to template so it can also be used for other efforts (staff is exploring possible integration with CRM / PM tools). Comments or suggestions on the draft? #9. Provide further guidance for sections 3.6 and clarification of section 3.7 (Appeal Process) (Standard Methodology for decision making): Develop briefing document as well as slides to explain concept of “consensus” in the PDP. Discussion on the draft. Further changes needed before turning into a slide deck? #2. Consider alternatives to open WG model: Prepare a comparison table for the proposed Working Group models, which could include several factors: membership eligibility, operating procedures, decision-making, communicating decision-making, urgency/timing (e.g., prioritization). Consider creating pros/cons as well. (Action item coming out of Council SPS 2019). Discussion on draft. AOB If you have any questions or suggested changes, please let me know. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Office Telephone: +1.310.301.5800 Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ http://gnso.icann.org/en/

2 1

Re: [GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT] Next PDP 3.0 Meeting Time
by Flip Petillion April 22, 2019

April 22, 2019

Hi Steve, I have a client meeting then and cannot attend a PDP 3.0 meeting. Best Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [signature_1018797922]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, 18 April 2019 at 02:35 To: "gnso-pdp3dot0-dt(a)icann.org" <gnso-pdp3dot0-dt(a)icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-PDP3Dot0-DT] Next PDP 3.0 Meeting Time Dear Councilors, As you probably heard on the previous call, Rafik will be on holiday on 29 April, which is when our bi-weekly meeting would normally be scheduled. He has proposed to move the meeting to 6 May instead, still at 13:00 UTC. If this new time proves problematic for some of you, we can prepare a Doodle poll to try and find a more appropriate time. So, can you please let us know if you will NOT be able to attend a PDP 3.0 meeting on 6 May at 13:00 UTC? Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Office Telephone: +1.310.301.5800 Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://learn.icann.org/> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ http://gnso.icann.org/en/

3 2

Next PDP 3.0 Meeting Time
by Steve Chan April 18, 2019

April 18, 2019

Dear Councilors, As you probably heard on the previous call, Rafik will be on holiday on 29 April, which is when our bi-weekly meeting would normally be scheduled. He has proposed to move the meeting to 6 May instead, still at 13:00 UTC. If this new time proves problematic for some of you, we can prepare a Doodle poll to try and find a more appropriate time. So, can you please let us know if you will NOT be able to attend a PDP 3.0 meeting on 6 May at 13:00 UTC? Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Office Telephone: +1.310.301.5800 Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ http://gnso.icann.org/en/

2 1

Actions & Notes: GNSO PDP 3.0 Small Team Meeting 15 April 13:00 UTC
by Ariel Liang April 16, 2019

April 16, 2019

Dear All, Please find below the action items and notes captured during the small team call on Monday, 15 April at 13:00 UTC. Staff has post to the wiki space the action items and notes. Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording and chat room records, which are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/UgB1Bg. Best Regards, Ariel Ariel Xinyue Liang GNSO Policy Support Specialist Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) == ACTION ITEMS For the Small Team: * Small Team to check the target dates of the items that are at risk or failing behind and determine if an adjustment needs to be made. * After accepting the modification to the Improvement #1 document, Small Team to reach out to ongoing PDP working groups (including Kurt for the EPDP) for input. * Small Team to review the WG charter template and see whether/what modification is needed in order to effectively integrate the data gathering checklist (Improvement #14). * Small Team to circle back to Improvement #13 after discussion on Improvement #6 has been completed. * Small Team to follow up on the homework for the following items via SLACK channels: * #11. (Enforce deadlines and ensure bite size pieces): Adapt fact sheet that is being used for EPDP Team to template so it can also be used for other efforts (staff is exploring possible integration with CRM / PM tools). Comments or suggestions on the draft? * #9. Provide further guidance for sections 3.6 and clarification of section 3.7 (Appeal Process) (Standard Methodology for decision making): Develop briefing document as well as slides to explain concept of “consensus” in the PDP. Discussion on the draft. Further changes needed before turning into a slide deck? * #2. Consider alternatives to open WG model: Prepare a comparison table for the proposed Working Group models, which could include several factors: membership eligibility, operating procedures, decision-making, communicating decision-making, urgency/timing (e.g., prioritization). Consider creating pros/cons as well. (Action item coming out of Council SPS 2019). Discussion on draft. For Staff: * Staff to make an explicit reference to action items related to the implementation steps in the work plan. [ONGOING] * Staff to investigate origins of the implementation recommendation #14, making sure the underlying purpose is well understood. NOTES 1. Welcome and roll call 2. Review of work plan a. Understanding the format b. Determining if changes should be made (e.g., to make it more achievable) - The Work Plan has visual cues that indicate when things are falling behind/at risk, so give readers a sense what needs to be worked on. Green = time, red = behind, yellow = at risk. - Actions are grouped together based on the specific implementation and further, by the category of improvements. - Original schedule was built in early 2019 so needs a reality check / adjustment. There are probably dependencies that can be built into the schedule. - Need to check the items with the default target completion date of July and see whether a new target date is needed ACTION ITEM: Small Team to check the target dates of the items that are at risk or failing behind and determine if an adjustment needs to be made. 3. Review of topics from last meeting and agreement on next steps a. #1 (Terms of participation for WG members): Review EPDP Statement of Participation and consult with EPDP Team / leadership what impact, if any, the statement of participation has had. Is this complete? - There is a need to consult with the EPDP Leadership Team on the implementation, after the changes to the revised document have been agreed by the Small Team. - Should the Small Team consolidate all the outreach items, or deal with outreach per individual improvement? - Besides the EPDP Leadership Team, the Small Team should solicit input from the leadership of other PDP WGs. - When the statement of participation needs to be completed by WG members? This may impact the WG member sign up process when SalesForce is used. - Suggested edits are intended to make the language more standard to be applied to all PDP working groups. - After the Small Team accepts the modification, the ongoing PDP chairs need to be consulted on the document. Their input may help make the decision on whether the statement of participation can be used for every PDP working group effort. ACTION ITEM: After accepting the modification to the Improvement #1 document, Small Team to reach out to ongoing PDP working groups (including Kurt for the EPDP) for input. b. #14 (flexibility of PDP): Develop draft set of criteria to evaluate request for data gathering and document this as a checklist to be used by a PDP WG. Is this complete? - If the check list is approved, it would likely require an update to the WG charter template. - If a consensus cannot be achieved, it seems that we have long past the point for collecting data to effectively facilitate the PDP effort. Need clarification on when the checklist can be used and how it can be used. - The purpose for this improvement is to “unstick” a PDP when consensus cannot be achieved. There are other implementations that are related to this purpose. - Need to think about what implementation steps are intended. In the working group charter there should be an item about data gathering, and the Council should contemplate on the potential budget required for data gathering. ACTION ITEM: Small Team to review the WG charter template and see whether/what modification is needed in order to effectively integrate the data gathering checklist. ACTION ITEM: Staff to make an explicit reference to action items related to the implementation steps in the work plan. [ONGOING] ACTION ITEM: Staff to investigate origins of the implementation recommendation #14, making sure the underlying purpose is well understood. c. #13. (Review of Working Group Leadership): Continue work of the SPS sub-group to make specific PDP 3.0 implementation recommendations. Discussion on next steps. - During the SPS, there was a document developed regarding leveraging the existing PDP assessment form and surveying how the PDP leadership are performing. The document did not get much traction. - Feedback on survey is that it is not helpful, but it can be part of the evaluation mechanism/toolkit. It is not clear what the evaluation mechanism would be. - Shouldn’t criteria be developed to hold the working group chairs accountable? A simple review form can be developed against the criteria. - Question is who should conduct the review of WG leadership and how. This question may be dealt later. - It may be helpful to tackle #13 and #6 together, as #6 identifies items that WG leaders should do. ACTION ITEM: Small Team to circle back to #13 after discussion on #6 has been completed. 4. Begin review of next topics: - The Small Team did not get to this part of the agenda; hence the following items have been assigned as homework for the Small Team to follow up on via SLACK channels. - #11. (Enforce deadlines and ensure bite size pieces): Adapt fact sheet that is being used for EPDP Team to template so it can also be used for other efforts (staff is exploring possible integration with CRM / PM tools). Comments or suggestions on the draft? - #9. Provide further guidance for sections 3.6 and clarification of section 3.7 (Appeal Process) (Standard Methodology for decision making): Develop briefing document as well as slides to explain concept of “consensus” in the PDP. Discussion on the draft. Further changes needed before turning into a slide deck? - #2. Consider alternatives to open WG model: Prepare a comparison table for the proposed Working Group models, which could include several factors: membership eligibility, operating procedures, decision-making, communicating decision-making, urgency/timing (e.g., prioritization). Consider creating pros/cons as well. (Action item coming out of Council SPS 2019). Discussion on draft. 5. AOB

1 0

Attendance and recording PDP3.0 call / Monday, 15 April 2019 at 13:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine April 15, 2019

April 15, 2019

Dear all, Please find attached the attendance and chat content, and below the Zoom recording of the PDP3.0 call on Monday, 15 April 2019 at 13:00 UTC . Zoom recording: https://icann.zoom.us/recording/share/JKmKEAgqX9X_wNH_bzreax3UegnmGLY-SHwLB… Thank you! Nathalie

1 0

Proposed agenda GNSO PDP 3.0
by Steve Chan April 13, 2019

April 13, 2019

Hello Team, Below, please find the proposed agenda for the PDP 3.0 Small Team Meeting on Monday 15 April at 13.00 UTC Welcome and roll call Review of work plan Understanding the format Determining if changes should be made (e.g., to make it more achievable) Review of topics from last meeting and agreement on next steps #1. (Terms of participation for WG members): Review EPDP Statement of Participation and consult with EPDP Team / leadership what impact, if any, the statement of participation has had. Is this complete? #14. (flexibility of PDP): Develop draft set of criteria to evaluate request for data gathering and document this as a checklist to be used by a PDP WG. Is this complete? #13. (Review of Working Group Leadership): Continue work of the SPS sub-group to make specific PDP 3.0 implementation recommendations. Discussion on next steps. Begin review of next topics: #11. (Enforce deadlines and ensure bite size pieces): Adapt fact sheet that is being used for EPDP Team to template so it can also be used for other efforts (staff is exploring possible integration with CRM / PM tools). Comments or suggestions on the draft? #9. Provide further guidance for sections 3.6 and clarification of section 3.7 (Appeal Process) (Standard Methodology for decision making): Develop briefing document as well as slides to explain concept of “consensus” in the PDP. Discussion on the draft. Further changes needed before turning into a slide deck? #2. Consider alternatives to open WG model: Prepare a comparison table for the proposed Working Group models, which could include several factors: membership eligibility, operating procedures, decision-making, communicating decision-making, urgency/timing (e.g., prioritization). Consider creating pros/cons as well. (Action item coming out of Council SPS 2019). Discussion on draft. AOB If you have any questions or suggested changes, please let me know. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Office Telephone: +1.310.301.5800 Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ http://gnso.icann.org/en/

5 4

Action items reminder
by Marika Konings April 9, 2019

April 9, 2019

Hi All, As a reminder, the following items are on your to do list for the upcoming PDP 3.0 small team meeting: * #1 (Terms of participation for WG members): Review EPDP Statement of Participation and consult with EPDP Team / leadership what impact, if any, the statement of participation has had & Consult with existing PDP Chairs whether the introduction of such a statement of participation would be deemed helpful, either for existing or future efforts * #14 (flexibility of PDP): small team to review / finalize draft set of criteria and check-list (see slack channel) * #13 (Review of Working Group Leadership): Small group of Councilors to continue work of the SPS sub-group to make specific PDP 3.0 implementation recommendations. (see slack channel) In relation to the first item, note that an updated version is available in the Slack channel for review. You may want to discuss during the upcoming meeting what would be the best approach as well as timing for consultation with existing PDP Chairs? Of course, you are encouraged to already share any input you may have on the proposed approach on the Slack channel. Best regards, Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses…> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>.

2 1