November 2017 - Ssr2-review

Skills
by Denise Michel Nov. 3, 2017

Nov. 3, 2017

Hi Staff. As part of application process for SSR2 did Staff have any skill categories or tags they used? If so please share. Thanks Denise Michel Sent via phone

2 1

Agenda for tomorrow’s meeting
by Denise Michel Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

Hi All We’re still waiting for word from the SO/AC chairs on whether we’re still paused. That will impact our agenda. We’ll be reviewing results from our outreach meetings for sure, including SSAC’ skill list. Please be prepared to summarize comments from “your” SO/AC. (Staff – please share any notes you have from our outreach meetings) Eric and I will update the previous 3 Nov agenda we sent out when we have more info. As always your ideas and comments are appreciated. Denise Michel Sent via phone

4 6

Re: [Ssr2-review] Drafting
by Geoff Huston Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

Eric, Just as a data point, I questioned paf and Rod last night as to whether they expected a letter as an outcome of your meeting with them yesterday, and they informed me that they had no expectation of any such letter. I assume they have no concerns about me reporting this information back to the entire SSR2 list, but I will copy them on this response so that they can feel free to comment directly without my mediation. As I was not invited to this meeting between a subset of SSR2 members and SSAC then I suppose I have no role in drafting a followup letter from SSR2, unsolicited or otherwise. I an writing to the entire SSR2 list because I continue to have concerns as to the way the SSR2 team is currently being chaired, and I feel it is appropriate to share my most recent concern about your actions here to the SSR2 mailing list so as to ensure it is part of the team’s archive of material. Firstly, I note your mail and my earlier response was only shared with a subset of SSR2 members. I apologise to other SSR2 members in my lapse in not including them in my response, which I hope this message rectifies, as I have added both your note Eric and my earlier (as yet unanswered) request for clarification as to the context of this proposed action to this posting to the larger SSR2 mailing list In this case Eric, my concern is that I have gained the impression that these actions step beyond reasonable norms of clear, open, transparent and inclusive leadership. Your note to to a subset of SSR2 members present here at ICANN inviting them to a session to draft a followup letter makes me very uneasy. I draw what I think is an obvious conclusion from your note that this proposed letter represents SSR2, yet refers to a meeting held on Wednesday with SSAC leadership where you only invited a subset of SSR2 members, and a meeting where you have not to date subsequently provided back to the entire SSR2 list any summary as to the matters discussed at the meeting. If you had anticipated that this proposed letter from SSR2 to have any weight and substance as representing SSR2, then I fail to understand how you could justify such an anticipation under these circumstances, particularly in your distinguished role as one of the co-chairs of this review. It is entirely possible I am mistaken in this matter and the context of “that letter to SSAC” does not in fact play any role in the carriage of SSR2 itself and this is merely a letter from a number of individuals, who are not in any way representing SSR2, yet have chosen to write formally to the SSAC. As to why these individuals feel the need to have such a letter placed on SSAC’s records of correspondence is not a question I can answer. Also, I would naturally expect that in such a limited context, such correspondence from these assorted individuals naturally could not make any undertakings or representations of SSR2 itself, as not all SSR2 members are even aware that such a restricted meeting took place yesterday, and some SSR2 members could well be unaware of the discussions that ensued and whether or not any undertakings in SSR2’s name were made by the individuals present there. I am personally sorry to raise this serious matter just as a rather difficult week draws to a conclusion, but I believe strongly that no rationale of expediency justifies any lapse of standards in offering to the entire SSR2 group careful and considered guidance within the principles of clear, open, transparent and inclusive leadership of SSR2, which I believe is appropriately expected of you as one of our co-chairs in this leadership role. Geoff > On 1 Nov 2017, at 5:54 pm, Geoff Huston <gih(a)apnic.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > I’m sorry to be dense here Eric, but I’m in the dark as to “that letter”. This was not a topic of the 4pm discussion, so I assume that the discussion you are referring to here is a sub-group's meeting with SSAC’s Rod and Patrik earlier in the day. Is that assumption correct? Or are you referring to something else? > > thanks, > > Geoff > > > >> On 1 Nov 2017, at 5:34 pm, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil(a)verisign.com> wrote: >> >> Hey all, >> >> Let’s get together and work on that letter to SSAC, from our discussion today. I am available any time between 8 and our team’s meeting with the Board (at 1). As a straw man, I propose 10am. We can meet at the reg desk and find a room from there. >> >> Can you all please ack this time, or propose an alternative some time tonight? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Eric >> >> Sent from my iPhone >

5 5

Fwd: Drafting
by Geoff Huston Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

I’m passing this on to the entire SSR2 team for Rod Geoff > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Rod Rasmussen <rod(a)rodrasmussen.com> > Subject: Fwd: [Ssr2-review] Drafting > Date: 2 November 2017 at 7:05:57 pm GMT+4 > To: Geoff Huston <gih(a)apnic.net>, "Osterweil, Eric" <eosterweil(a)verisign.com>, Don Blumenthal <dmb(a)donblumenthal.com> > Cc: Denise Michel <denisemichel(a)fb.com>, Patrik Fältström <patrik(a)frobbit.se> > > Forwarding this to the SSAC appointees and Eric as co-chair, since I forgot that I can’t mail directly to your mailing list and got a moderation notification and don’t know if this will get eaten up by the system. > > Cheers, > > Rod > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: Rod Rasmussen <rod(a)rodrasmussen.com <mailto:rod@rodrasmussen.com>> >> Subject: Re: [Ssr2-review] Drafting >> Date: November 2, 2017 at 8:01:04 AM PDT >> To: Denise Michel <denisemichel(a)fb.com <mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> >> Cc: SSR2 Review Team Email List <ssr2-review(a)icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>>, Patrik Fältström <paf(a)frobbit.se <mailto:paf@frobbit.se>> >> >> Thank you very much for this Denise, >> >> I think this clears up the confusion introduced by the term “letter” that I’m perceiving was used in prior communications and caused concerns. "Letter" implies a formal document or outreach which we didn’t believe was discussed nor what we were expecting. To clear up things on the thoughts of the folks from the SSAC in the room, we were looking to help your team by providing suggestions of ways to document things primarily for your use and potentially community communications, and of course for us to have a look at what you can share with our team in SSAC to better understand the issues you’re facing and potentially give further input. I’d suggest it is best to pass anything you develop and that we may provide as input back and forth via our appointed members to keep to good practices. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Rod >> >>> On Nov 1, 2017, at 11:08 PM, Denise Michel <denisemichel(a)fb.com <mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, All. >>> >>> It has been a crazy week on the ground in Abu Dhabi and events and discussions have been evolving and a bit unpredictable (following the SSAC’s and Board’s letters). >>> >>> The good news is that several SSAC members were keen to talk more about issues that were raised and asked Eric to help grab Team members who were at the conference centre at the time for an informal chat. I think this was a really positive thing. >>> >>> These SSAC folks asked for specific SSR2 information to be delivered to them in a specific way that they would find more useful. For example, they asked that we take our topics/activities and tag each one with “SSRS1” or “SSR2” or both. >>> >>> Anything that is developed or “re-packaged” will, of course, be posted on the SSR2 list for everyone’s review and comment. >>> >>> I hope this clears up any misunderstanding. Please email if there are further questions. >>> >>> Best, >>> Denise >>> >>> Denise Michel >>> Domain Name System Strategy & Management >>> Facebook, Inc. >>> denisemichel(a)fb.com <mailto:denisemichel@fb.com> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 11/2/17, 9:14 AM, "ssr2-review-bounces(a)icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Osterweil, Eric via Ssr2-review" <ssr2-review-bounces(a)icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of ssr2-review(a)icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> wrote: >>> >>> Geoff (et al), >>> >>> >>> >>> Sorry for the confusion here. During an random encounter, a few of us were tapped to have a chat with some of the SSAC folks. I just shot a note out to the people who were standing around. There was no intent behind this selection, and no intended omission of personnel. The note in question is just intended to summarize our team’s status and membership to date in a way that SSAC can ingest (no positioning intended). That said, thank you for sending the below note to the entire team. As you suggest, it has been a rather intense week, and it seems some wires have been inadvertently crossed. >>> >>> >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >>> >>> On 11/2/17, 6:13 AM, "Geoff Huston" <gih(a)apnic.net <mailto:gih@apnic.net>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Eric, >>> >>> >>> >>> Just as a data point, I questioned paf and Rod last night as to whether they expected a letter as an outcome of your meeting with them yesterday, and they informed me that they had no expectation of any such letter. I assume they have no concerns about me reporting this information back to the entire SSR2 list, but I will copy them on this response so that they can feel free to comment directly without my mediation. As I was not invited to this meeting between a subset of SSR2 members and SSAC then I suppose I have no role in drafting a followup letter from SSR2, unsolicited or otherwise. >>> >>> >>> >>> I an writing to the entire SSR2 list because I continue to have concerns as to the way the SSR2 team is currently being chaired, and I feel it is appropriate to share my most recent concern about your actions here to the SSR2 mailing list so as to ensure it is part of the team’s archive of material. >>> >>> >>> >>> Firstly, I note your mail and my earlier response was only shared with a subset of SSR2 members. I apologise to other SSR2 members in my lapse in not including them in my response, which I hope this message rectifies, as I have added both your note Eric and my earlier (as yet unanswered) request for clarification as to the context of this proposed action to this posting to the larger SSR2 mailing list >>> >>> >>> >>> In this case Eric, my concern is that I have gained the impression that these actions step beyond reasonable norms of clear, open, transparent and inclusive leadership. Your note to to a subset of SSR2 members present here at ICANN inviting them to a session to draft a followup letter makes me very uneasy. I draw what I think is an obvious conclusion from your note that this proposed letter represents SSR2, yet refers to a meeting held on Wednesday with SSAC leadership where you only invited a subset of SSR2 members, and a meeting where you have not to date subsequently provided back to the entire SSR2 list any summary as to the matters discussed at the meeting. If you had anticipated that this proposed letter from SSR2 to have any weight and substance as representing SSR2, then I fail to understand how you could justify such an anticipation under these circumstances, particularly in your distinguished role as one of the co-chairs of this review. >>> >>> >>> >>> It is entirely possible I am mistaken in this matter and the context of “that letter to SSAC” does not in fact play any role in the carriage of SSR2 itself and this is merely a letter from a number of individuals, who are not in any way representing SSR2, yet have chosen to write formally to the SSAC. As to why these individuals feel the need to have such a letter placed on SSAC’s records of correspondence is not a question I can answer. Also, I would naturally expect that in such a limited context, such correspondence from these assorted individuals naturally could not make any undertakings or representations of SSR2 itself, as not all SSR2 members are even aware that such a restricted meeting took place yesterday, and some SSR2 members could well be unaware of the discussions that ensued and whether or not any undertakings in SSR2’s name were made by the individuals present there. >>> >>> >>> >>> I am personally sorry to raise this serious matter just as a rather difficult week draws to a conclusion, but I believe strongly that no rationale of expediency justifies any lapse of standards in offering to the entire SSR2 group careful and considered guidance within the principles of clear, open, transparent and inclusive leadership of SSR2, which I believe is appropriately expected of you as one of our co-chairs in this leadership role. >>> >>> >>> >>> Geoff >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > On 1 Nov 2017, at 5:54 pm, Geoff Huston <gih(a)apnic.net <mailto:gih@apnic.net>> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Hi, >>> >>> > >>> >>> > I’m sorry to be dense here Eric, but I’m in the dark as to “that letter”. This was not a topic of the 4pm discussion, so I assume that the discussion you are referring to here is a sub-group's meeting with SSAC’s Rod and Patrik earlier in the day. Is that assumption correct? Or are you referring to something else? >>> >>> > >>> >>> > thanks, >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Geoff >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> >> On 1 Nov 2017, at 5:34 pm, Osterweil, Eric <eosterweil(a)verisign.com <mailto:eosterweil@verisign.com>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Hey all, >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Let’s get together and work on that letter to SSAC, from our discussion today. I am available any time between 8 and our team’s meeting with the Board (at 1). As a straw man, I propose 10am. We can meet at the reg desk and find a room from there. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Can you all please ack this time, or propose an alternative some time tonight? >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Thanks, >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Eric >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ssr2-review mailing list >>> Ssr2-review(a)icann.org <mailto:Ssr2-review@icann.org> >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l… <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> >>> >> >

1 0

Re: [Ssr2-review] Tomorrow's SSR2 meeting - attendance
by Jennifer Bryce Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

Hi all, Please advise if there are any changes to the below for the 3 November meeting: Attending Alain Denise Eric Geoff Kaveh Noorul Ameen Norm Ram Krishna Žarko Remote Attending Matogoro Don Not Attending Boban James Mohamad Amin Kerry-Ann From: <ssr2-review-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Denise Michel <denisemichel(a)fb.com> Date: Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 11:07 AM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review(a)icann.org>, ssr2-coordination <ssr2-coordination(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ssr2-review] Tomorrow's SSR2 meeting - attendance Hi. Staff – please re-send tomorrow’s attendance list when you have a chance. All – please send an email to the list if there’s a change, Thanks Denise Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel(a)fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>

5 4

Fwd: Skills requirements input ideas for SSR2-RT
by Geoff Huston Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

Hi All, I promised Rod that I would pass this along to the entire list - Rod's offer of a conversation is sincere and Don and I are happy to facilitate that as neeed regards, Geoff > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Rod Rasmussen <rod(a)rodrasmussen.com> > Subject: Skills requirements input ideas for SSR2-RT > Date: 2 November 2017 at 3:41:49 pm GMT+4 > To: Denise Michel <denisemichel(a)fb.com>, "Osterweil, Eric" <eosterweil(a)verisign.com>, Don Blumenthal <dmb(a)donblumenthal.com>, Geoff Huston <gih(a)apnic.net> > Cc: Patrik Fältström <patrik(a)frobbit.se> > > Hi Folks, > > As we talked about in our informal get-together tomorrow, a few of us from SSAC have pulled together a list of skills applicable to doing a lot of the work you are tasked with from our own skills survey and own experiences. This is informal and not an official SSAC communication, but rather represents input we gathered quickly from several of our members to help you with the issues we know you’ve been wrestling with on the area of necessary skills. We also know that we have some SSAC members interested in joining the SSR2-RT to help with the next phase of your work to help fill some of the gaps you may have should the SO/AC Chairs wish to name more members, which I personally hope happens. I will be sending this e-mail to the entire SSAC as well so they are up-to-speed on our assistance and individual members may have some further thoughts to add at some point. > > I am sending this to the co-chairs and the SSAC appointees to SSR2 in order to make sure it gets disseminated, as I of course cannot send to the list itself. > > Please feel free to get back to us with any questions - best through our appointees Geoff and Don so they can send those around and get feedback. > > I, of course, stand ready to assist in any way I can in my personal capacity, and am happy to chat with any/all of you about ways some or all of us in SSAC can help or provide some advice. We ALL want this to end with a highly successful review! > > Cheers, > > Rod > > ================================ > > With this list we hope that the SSR2-RT can: > > 1. state which of its members has skills/experience in each area. (Suggest a Matrix: one axis with skills, other axis with members) > 2. look at the its mandate points and tasks (notably the 28 recommendations from SSR1) and determine which skills/experience areas are relevant to each. (Suggest a Matrix: one axis with recommendations/mandate/whatever, other axis with skill/experience.) > > This exercise should reveal whether there are any gaps on the SSR2 team that need to be filled. > > > Some of the below are practice areas (such as Information Security). Some are areas of subject expertise that are important to mention specifically (for example, directory services operations). Some practice areas may assume or cover certain subjects. (For example, risk analysis may assume knowledge of disaster planning and recovery.) Didn’t want to get too granular. In a matrix they could all be on one list, undifferentiated. > > Practice areas: > > Information Security (IS) > > Information Technology (IT) > > Project management > > Security auditing and standards > > Risk assessment / analysis > > Data analytics > > Contractual compliance > > > > Subject expertise: > > DNS > > Network architecture/design and operations > > Root server operations > > Directory services operations > > ICANN policy > > ICANN strategic plan and budget > > PTI functions > > Internet protocols > > Penetration testing > >

1 0

Meet-up now a ICANN registration desk
by Denise Michel Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

To work on info request for some SSAC members Denise Michel Sent via phone

6 15

Re: [Ssr2-review] [Ext] Re: Meetings
by Jennifer Bryce Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

Hi all, Please note below which sessions are open/closed. 1:00 - 1:50 | SSR2-RT meeting with Board | Hall A, Sec B/C - Closed, private meeting. Not open to observers. 2:00 - 3:00 | SSR2 Discussion with ICANN Board | Hall A, Sec B/C (Board, SSR2, SOs/ACs/ Constituencies Chairs) - Open to observers Apologies for any confusion. We will let you know if there are any more changes. Best, Jennifer From: "Osterweil, Eric" <eosterweil(a)verisign.com> Date: Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 10:08 AM To: Jennifer Bryce <jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org>, ssr2-coordination <ssr2-coordination(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Ssr2-review] Meetings Hey, Could you remind me which of these meetings are Publix please? Thanks, Eric Sent from my iPhone On Nov 2, 2017, at 9:38 AM, Jennifer Bryce <jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org<mailto:jennifer.bryce@icann.org>> wrote: Hi all, To confirm, here are the meetings today: 1:00 - 1:50 | SSR2-RT meeting with Board | Hall A, Sec B/C 2:00 - 3:00 | SSR2 Discussion with ICANN Board | Hall A, Sec B/C (Board, SSR2, SOs/ACs/ Constituencies Chairs) A/C room: https://participate.icann.org/board1 International dial-in information: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=7251967966&num=1-719-…<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.myrcplus.com_cnums…> Participant passcode: 725 196 7966 The invites will be updated with the information. The additional calendar invite for 1:45 - 3:15 is duplicative and will be removed shortly. From: <ssr2-review-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Denise Michel <denisemichel(a)fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 6:47 AM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review(a)icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>>, ssr2-coordination <ssr2-coordination(a)icann.org<mailto:ssr2-coordination@icann.org>> Subject: [Ssr2-review] Meetings Hi Staff. Could you please confirm both by email and by calendar invites the time and location of SSR2’s meeting with the Board. I think many of us have several different times now on our calendars. Also, Mr. Mattagoro was not allowed on to the phone bridge when he called in for the SSR2‘s meeting with SSAC. We’d appreciate your help in ensuring that this does not happen again. Thank you Denise Michel Sent via phone _______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review(a)icann.org<mailto:Ssr2-review@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review

3 2

SSR2-RT meeting with Board - 2 November - 13:00 GST / 09:00 UTC
by Board Calendaring Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

TIMING CHANGED TO 13:00 https://participate.icann.org/board1 List of International Dial In Numbers: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=7251967966&num=1-719-… Participant Passcode: 725 196 7966

1 0

SSR2 Discussion with ICANN Board - 2 November - 14:00 GST / 10:00 UTC
by Board Calendaring Nov. 2, 2017

Nov. 2, 2017

Should the Chair of your Group have a conflict and cannot join this meeting, please make sure to appoint a representative for your Group. REMOTE PARTICIPANTS: Please identify yourself in the Adobe Room. Adobe Connect https://participate.icann.org/abu60-hallac

1 0