- Ssr2-review - lists.icann.org

Terms of Reference template
by Jennifer Bryce Aug. 23, 2018

Aug. 23, 2018

Dear all, Please find attached the Terms of Reference template, as discussed. Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce Senior Reviews Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann www.icann.org

1 0

ToR
by Denise Michel Aug. 23, 2018

Aug. 23, 2018

Terms of Reference (Original Deadline in Board Resolution - March 30, 2017) This original deadline was not going to be met since the Team appointments were completed late and the Team met for the first time on 15 March 2017. On 22 March 2017 the SSR2 Team noted in their Slides (p.6-7)<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_di…> that the Board needed to be emailed about the deadline. In the email archive, Kaveh (message on 28 March<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mm.icann.org_pipermail_…>) said that the Board has been informed and that he will wait for feedback; none was forthcoming. [Inline images 6] Terms of Reference- SSR2 Meeting - 2 May 2017 The Terms of Reference v.3 was discussed. In the meeting transcript Emily (co-chair) suggested that the Team had ample discussion about, and work on, ToR and that everyone was pretty happy (p. 7). Eric (co-chair) questioned whether any members were still concerned, but then when he asked, some of the potential objectors he named said they were happy with Emily's proposal for adoption. <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_di…> Meeting transcript (pg. 7-8)<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_di…> [Inline images 1] [Inline images 2] Chat Transcript, meeting 9 (p.3) <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_di…> [Inline images 3] After addressing the minor wording and definitional issues suggested by members of the SSR2 Team, a 24 hour "final comments via email" period was suggested before the final draft was to be uploaded and sent to the Board. These changes were made and uploaded as v. 4 of the TOR and sent to the mailing list on May 3rd. (See Email Log, Wednesday May 3<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mm.icann.org_pipermail_…>) [Inline images 4] No objections were raised in the email archive of the SSR2 team<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mm.icann.org_pipermail_…> in that 24 hour period, nor later. Thus, consensus was reached and Version 4 of the Terms of Reference<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_di…> was adopted on 4 May and sent to the Board (on Thursday 11 May<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mm.icann.org_pipermail_…>). [Inline images 5] I

1 0

Communications matrix example
by Jennifer Bryce Aug. 23, 2018

Aug. 23, 2018

1 0

Excerpt from Terms of Reference
by Jennifer Bryce Aug. 23, 2018

Aug. 23, 2018

Dear all, As discussed: Here is the link to the Review Team’s Terms of Reference, adopted in May 2017: https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/Terms+of+Reference?preview=/6407612… Operations of the review team, including decision making and roles and responsibilities of team members/leadership is on pages 5-7. Pasted below. Operation of the Review Team Decision Making Section 4.6. of ICANN’s Bylaws states: SPECIFIC REVIEWS (iii) – “Review team decision-making practices shall be specified in the Operating Standards, with the expectation that review teams shall try to operate on a consensus basis. In the event a consensus cannot be found among the members of a review team, a majority vote of the members may be taken.” In accordance with this article of the Bylaws the SSR2-RT has agreed, by consensus, that it will strive to make its decisions on a consensus basis. This means that all Team members agree on a position, or only a small minority of Team members disagree, but most agree. To the extent that the SSR2-RT is unable to achieve consensus with respect to any recommendations, its reports and recommendations will include minority views.[1] Decisions of the SSR2-RT will be made at meetings, either face-to- face or via teleconference (teleconference or Adobe), and via the SSR2-RT’s email list, as requested by the Co-Chairs. Leadership At its meeting on March 22 2017 the SSR2-RT selected by consensus Denise Michel, Emily Taylor and Eric Osterweil as Co-Chairs. Responsibilities of the Co-Chairs include: * Remain neutral when serving as Co-Chair * Identify when speaking as an advocate * Maintain standards and focus on the aims of the Review Team as established in its Terms of Reference * Drive toward delivery of key milestones according to the Work Plan * Ensure effective communication between members and with broader community, board and staff * Set the agenda and run the meetings * Ensure that all meeting attendees get accurate, timely and clear information * Determine and identify the level of consensus within the team * Provide clarity on team decisions * Ensure decisions are acted upon * Build and develop teamwork * Facilitate RT reporting to the community to maintain accountability and transparency Responsibilities of SSR2-RT members include: * Attend all calls and face to face meetings where feasible * Actively engage on email list, including providing feedback when requested to do so through that medium * Actively engage with relevant stakeholder groups within the ICANN community, and within each team member’s local constituencies * Provide input and comments based on core expertise and experience * Undertake desk research as required and in accordance with scope of work * Be prepared to listen to others and make compromises in order to achieve consensus recommendations * Participate in drafting and sub-groups as required. -- Jennifer Bryce Senior Reviews Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann www.icann.org ________________________________ [1] The nature and use of consensus and minority views are informed by the “GNSO Working Group Guidelines<https://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/gnso-working-group-guidelines-final-…>”

1 0

Leadership vote for SSR2
by Phil G Khoury Aug. 23, 2018

Aug. 23, 2018

Dear Boban, Amin and Mr Matagoro, Just giving you an alert that in the course of today’s session of the SSR2 face-to-face meeting we will be looking at selecting leaders for the team’s restart. If you are able to check your emails, it would be great if you can participate. At some stage in the next few hours, we will ask for nominations and then if we have a contest, we will email out a confidential ballot to all team members and ask for your votes to be emailed back by the end of the day here (Washington 5pm – UTC 2100). Best regards Phil Phil KhouryPrincipal phil(a)crkhoury.com tel +61 3 9421 3111 mob +61 431 500 999 cameron. ralph. khoury Cameron Ralph Pty Ltd | PO Box 307 East Melbourne VIC 8002 | Australia This email may contain confidential information. If received in error, please let us know us by reply email or phone and delete this email.

2 1

SSR2 next teleconference and Washington
by Phil Khoury Aug. 20, 2018

Aug. 20, 2018

Hello team, In the interests of efficiency (and trying to keep everyone in a better mood ☺), I am proposing to cancel the scheduled team meeting for this Thursday. I have no burning need for a team gathering prior to the F2F and I am hopefully going to be talking to most of you one-to-one in the next few days anyway. There are a couple of action items which we can handle by email. If anyone has a major objection, please advise asap. I have a couple of requests for you prior to the F2F: 1. Please come with your best intention for the group – if we fail, there will be plenty of time to wonder if it is all worth it afterwards. 2. Come prepared to share something about yourself. 3. Please come prepared to speak up - it is important that anything the team decides from here on includes everyone’s inputs. 4. For the original members of the team, please refresh your memory on any issues out of the team’s history - as needed 5. For new team members, please finish any background reading - and bring a list of questions for whatever is not clear. 6. For all, please think hard about how much time you can personally commit to the Review going forward. 7. While we have to spend some time going over what happened in the past, the purpose is not to figure out whether whatever happened was fair, who is to blame or who was right all along, the purpose is to identify the lessons to be applied for the next phase. Looking forward to meeting you all in person - see you in Washington. Best Phil Phil KhouryFacilitator – ICANN SSR2 phil(a)crkhoury.com tel +61 3 9421 3111 mob +61 431 500 999 (also WhatsApp)skype phil.khoury cameron. ralph. khoury Cameron Ralph Pty Ltd | PO Box 307 East Melbourne VIC 8002 | Australia This email may contain confidential information. If received in error, please let us know us by reply email or phone and delete this email.

3 2

Re: [Ssr2-review] Facilitation - SSR2 Review Team update
by Phil Khoury Aug. 18, 2018

Aug. 18, 2018

Hi Tripti, I am providing this quick update note on progress with the SSR2 Review Team. I know that you indicated this wouldn't be necessary, but I felt that with Geoff Huston’s unexpected resignation from the team, the SO/AC Chairs may be concerned about status. You may be aware that the team are meeting face-to-face for three days in Washington DC next week. We will have 15 of the team members there in person and one attending remotely, which is very positive. Geoff’s resignation has been a disappointment and his input will be missed – however I have no sense that anyone thinks this is fatal to the team’s prospects of restarting successfully. Over the last four weeks I have had at least one interview with each team member, two with most and in some cases a number of individual discussions. I have provided a confidential summary note of the issues that have been raised with me - which the team seem to have generally accepted. Based on my assessment of the issues that have to be dealt with, I have drafted a set of objectives for the face-to-face meeting which the team has agreed to. Finally, I have shared a session plan for the face-to-face in Washington DC for comment and have adopted a few suggestions made to me. Team members have provided brief summaries of the progress that was made in each of the work streams prior to the pause and the MSSI team have reorganized some of the information on the team wiki to see if that would make things easier for the new team members to navigate. The team has had a number of teleconference meetings to discuss all of the above and to sort out some logistics issues. It is fair to say that these have been pretty unsatisfactory as a format in which to deal with important issues and it quickly became apparent that until we are able to be face-to-face, attempting to tackle substantive matters was likely to be quite negative. I recognise that this has caused some considerable frustration at the lack of progress and I can well imagine that some team members are not filled with optimism at this point! None of this should be terribly surprising. We have made steps forward and steps backwards in the last few weeks as is to be expected. In my experience with other similar processes, it is also not unusual for stress and negativity to spike in the days prior to the point of confronting difficult issues. That said, a significant positive is the strong motivation amongst the team members to deal with the outstanding issues raised by the Chairs, put the pause behind them and to get back into the SSR review work. Some good people have joined the team and we now have some uninterrupted face-to-face time to see what can be achieved. I remain of the view that there is a good prospect of a successful outcome from this meeting. The only request I would have is to make sure that the team have this time to work through the issues themselves without being too concerned by observers or what the community is thinking. For transparency, I have copied the Review team into this note. Please let me know if you need anything further or wish to discuss. Thanks for your support, Regards Phil Phil KhouryFacilitator – ICANN SSR2 phil(a)crkhoury.com tel +61 3 9421 3111 mob +61 431 500 999 (also WhatsApp)skype phil.khoury cameron. ralph. khoury Cameron Ralph Pty Ltd | PO Box 307 East Melbourne VIC 8002 | Australia This email may contain confidential information. If received in error, please let us know us by reply email or phone and delete this email.

1 0

My resignation from SSR2
by Geoff Huston Aug. 17, 2018

Aug. 17, 2018

Hi, I wish to advise you that I have informed the MSSI Secretariat and the chair of SSAC of my resignation from the SSR2 team. I would’ve preferred to have seen this work through to some logical completion, but my personal circumstances have changed such that this is no longer a reasonable option for me. My thanks to the MSSI team for their support of the SSR2 work to date, and my best wishes to the team members for the future of this review. regards, Geoff Huston

2 1

NDA discussion summary
by Jennifer Bryce Aug. 16, 2018

Aug. 16, 2018

Dear SSR2 Review Team, Below please find a summary of the position arrived at regarding the Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) prior to the pause. ICANN shared the NDA with the team because of Bylaw requirements Article 4 Section 4.6 (vi) [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…> of the ICANN Bylaws includes the statement that “ICANN may require review team members to sign a non-disclosure agreement before accessing documents.” For this reason, the NDA and Confidential Disclosure Framework (CDF) documents were first shared<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ssr2-review/2017-May/000231.html> with the Review Team on 2 May 2017. At this time, Review Team members were informed that they are not obligated to sign the NDA to continue to serve on the Review Team, but if they elect not to sign the NDA, there may be instances where they will be restricted from accessing, using or discussing any confidential information provided by ICANN org under the NDA. Prior to the pause, only some members had signed the NDA (see the list here<https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/Legal+Documents>). Subgroup discussions in LA did not expose sensitive or business proprietary information which needed an NDA During the face-to-face meeting that took place in October 2017<https://community.icann.org/x/KRghB> in Los Angeles, we had some struggles between the questions that the review team asked and ICANN org staff’s willingness to discuss items without the review team members signing an NDA. There were some topics raised by the review team that ICANN org deemed to be business proprietary and to expose the data surrounding those topics without signed NDAs could potentially put the organization at risk. At that time, there were a number of review team members who did sign the NDA, but parallel to that, the ICANN org staff that supports the SSR2 review worked with the review team and ICANN org subject-matter experts to better understand the questions being asked, and to determine if there was a way to answer the questions without exposing data that could put the organization at risk. The end result of those discussions was that the ICANN org staff that had functional ownership of these topics had a better understanding of what the review team was asking and was able to come back to the room and have meaningful conversations about the operations and strategy of the topic without needing to expose data that would have fallen within the parameters of the NDA. This experience helped the review team to better focus questions, and the organization to better understand the spirit of the questions being asked, so that resulting discussions did not need to expose sensitive or business proprietary information which would invoke the need for an NDA. Prior to the pause, review team members worked with ICANN org to revise the NDA based on their concerns Some review team members expressed concerns with language in the NDA that was shared in May 2017. On 18 August 2017, two members of the review team (James Gannon, Kerry-Ann Barrett) met with ICANN Legal on behalf of the team to share the team’s concerns and understand ICANN’s Bylaw requirements. ICANN org revised the NDA based on input from James and Kerry-Ann, and a revised version was circulated to the team via email<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ssr2-review/2017-August/000573.html> on 29 August 2017 for the team’s input (this is the current NDA posted to the wiki here<https://community.icann.org/x/LxLfAw>). Kerry-Ann gave a brief overview of the revisions during the 12 September 2017 plenary meeting<https://community.icann.org/x/pXXwAw>. During several more team discussions in September 2017 some review team members expressed their continued concern with signing the NDA and some noted that, as a next step, they would need to have their respective Legal teams review the document. The IANA Transition subgroup had requested access to several documents and ICANN org was working to establish which documents would require a signed NDA before they could be shared. In October 2017, the ICANN SSR subgroup met face-to-face in LA and was able to have productive discussions without the NDA in place (see summary above). We hope this is a helpful summary, please let us know if you have questions. Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce Senior Reviews Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann www.icann.org

1 0

Action Required - SSR2 Action Item and a Doodle poll with the options - doodle poll closes today
by MSSI Secretariat Aug. 13, 2018

Aug. 13, 2018

Hi All - Reminder, if you have not already done so, please participate in the SSR2 Doodle Poll (link below) for the ICANN63 Meeting - (https://doodle.com/poll/ih5ve874p28zkn6e) - poll closes at 23:59 UTC today, Monday, 13 August. Kind Regards, Yvette Guigneaux Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Cell: 310-460-8432 | Email: yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org<mailto:yvette.guigneaux@icann.org> | Skype: yvette.guigneaux Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D3A0F8.F8351BC0] From: MSSI Secretariat Sent: Friday, August 10, 2018 1:19 PM To: 'SSR2' <ssr2-review(a)icann.org> Subject: Action Required - Action Item and a Doodle poll with the options Dear all, I am sending the below message to the review team on behalf of Phil Khoury. This email will address the following Action Item from 09 August 2018 meeting: Action Item: Staff/Phil to circulate email regarding options to meet at ICANN63 and a Doodle poll with the options. ---- Hello all, I have had another look at the Barcelona options. Let's just start with availability and then narrow down to viable options. (Note that all team members can be supported for travel to Barcelona provided there is a properly scheduled team meeting there.) Please take into account your likely travel arrival/departure times. Can everyone please complete the Doodle Poll at (https://doodle.com/poll/ih5ve874p28zkn6e) by 23:59 UTC on Monday, 13 August. Once we have that, we can talk detailed options. Regards Phil ________________________________ Kind Regards, Yvette Guigneaux Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Cell: 310-460-8432 | Email: yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org<mailto:yvette.guigneaux@icann.org> | Skype: yvette.guigneaux Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D3A0F8.F8351BC0]

1 0