In the next 24 hours, please indicate your support or opposition for the alternative text proposed by Boban: Mindful of the Board’s and Staff’s advice regarding the need for implementable recommendations, the Review Team will strive to provide specific recommendations. Where appropriate, this may require precision, depth or specific examples for recommendations to be actionable by ICANN Org following the review instead of: Mindful of the Board’s and Staff’s advice regarding the need for implementable recommendations, the Review Team will strive to provide recommendations that are specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely (SMART). Where appropriate, this may require precision, depth or specific examples for recommendations to be actionable by ICANN Org following the review Current scope document included below for reference. Boban and Kerry-Ann – I’ve noted your support for the alternative text. Thanks. Denise Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com> Dear SO/AC Chairs; Please find enclosed a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective of the scope of this review. As requested, the SSR2 is completing the requested item to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope.” We hope this meets your requirements regarding the Review Team’s perspective on the scope of this review. The current Terms of Reference for SSR2’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found here. Additional information on SSR2 activities, including the work plan can be found on the Review Team’s wiki. Please let us know if you require anything further. Regards, The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2) ............ Scope The Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR2 or Review Team) has operated and conducted its work according to its adopted scope (detailed in its Terms of Reference document), which was adopted by consensus of the Review Team on 4 May 2017. We would like to offer an overview on the overarching tenets that were adopted and that guided the development of the scope of this review that we hope will be helpful to the SO and AC chairs in considering the parameters associated with resuming this effort: Breadth vs. Depth: In such a review, we believe that it is, in general, more helpful to look at breadth and the broader aspects of security, stability and resiliency rather than dive into depth in just a small number of issues. We believe this approach will lend itself to more informed conclusions that can be contextualized. Capability vs. Behaviors: We believe that it is more helpful in the context of this review to look at the capability of ICANN to manage issues related to security, stability and resiliency rather than being overly prescriptive as to how ICANN should respond to particular circumstances that have arisen in the past or may arise in the future. Perspective vs. Prescription: We believe that it is more helpful to review aspects of institutional awareness and capability with respect to topics related to security, stability, and resiliency, rather than provide a detailed prescription of the appropriate responses to be used in particular cases. Mindful of the Board’s and Staff’s advice regarding the need for implementable recommendations, the Review Team will strive to provide recommendations that are specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely (SMART). Where appropriate, this may require precision, depth or specific examples for recommendations to be actionable by ICANN Org following the review.