Scope document - action needed
Hi, Team. Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov. It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items. Best, Denise Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>
Hi, All. Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close. Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss. We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc). Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft. As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week. 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. From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: Scope document - action needed Hi, Team. Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov. It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items. Best, Denise Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>
Thanks for pulling the chain of discussion together. I believe we are dickering on minor points which do not materially affect the overall statement. In a word: Yes. … Norm
On Nov 7, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Hi, All.
Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close.
Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss.
We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc).
Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft.
As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week.
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.
From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com <mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: Scope document - action needed
Hi, Team.
Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov.
It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items.
Best, Denise
Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com <mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>
<Scope of the Review Draft - Geoff Huston edits.pdf>_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org <mailto:Ssr2-review@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review>
Yes From: <ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Norm Ritchie <norm@webcatcher.ca> Date: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 2:33 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ssr2-review] Scope document - action needed Thanks for pulling the chain of discussion together. I believe we are dickering on minor points which do not materially affect the overall statement. In a word: Yes. … Norm On Nov 7, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> wrote: Hi, All. Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close. Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss. We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc). Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft. As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week. 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. From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: Scope document - action needed Hi, Team. Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov. It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items. Best, Denise Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com> <Scope of the Review Draft - Geoff Huston edits.pdf>_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:Ssr2-review@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
No, although I won’t argue my reasons. The more we explain, the more we put ourselves in a defensive position. I also have a severe aversion to work measurement slogans and acronyms. It goes back at least to TQM, the earliest that comes to mind, and has continued through SMART. I’m fairly certain it will go on when another consultant-driven fad supersedes SMART. Don On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:34 PM Osterweil, Eric via Ssr2-review < ssr2-review@icann.org> wrote:
Yes
*From: *<ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Norm Ritchie < norm@webcatcher.ca> *Date: *Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 2:33 PM *To: *SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] Re: [Ssr2-review] Scope document - action needed
Thanks for pulling the chain of discussion together.
I believe we are dickering on minor points which do not materially affect the overall statement.
In a word: Yes.
… Norm
On Nov 7, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Hi, All.
Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by *11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC*). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close.
*Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline*. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss.
We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc).
Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft.
As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week.
Thanks.
Denise
Denise Michel
Domain Name System Strategy & Management
Facebook, Inc.
*denisemichel@fb.com <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.
*From: *Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> *Date: *Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM *To: *SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> *Subject: *Scope document - action needed
Hi, Team.
Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov.
It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items.
Best,
Denise
Denise Michel
Domain Name System Strategy & Management
Facebook, Inc.
*denisemichel@fb.com <denisemichel@fb.com>*
<Scope of the Review Draft - Geoff Huston edits.pdf> _______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
On 7 Nov 2017, at 20:13, Don Blumenthal <dmb@donblumenthal.com> wrote:
No, although I won’t argue my reasons. The more we explain, the more we put ourselves in a defensive position.
I am with Don on this. The goal of this message is to explain the scope which we were following which put us in this situation or to define the scope as we see fit the best the work we are tasked to do?
I also have a severe aversion to work measurement slogans and acronyms. It goes back at least to TQM, the earliest that comes to mind, and has continued through SMART. I’m fairly certain it will go on when another consultant-driven fad supersedes SMART.
+1. I dont think we need slogans and acronyms in this response… I would recommend that effort be made to get a "full consensus" on this. hope this helps —Alain
Don
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:34 PM Osterweil, Eric via Ssr2-review <ssr2-review@icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> wrote:
Yes
From: <ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Norm Ritchie <norm@webcatcher.ca <mailto:norm@webcatcher.ca>> Date: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 2:33 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ssr2-review] Scope document - action needed
Thanks for pulling the chain of discussion together.
I believe we are dickering on minor points which do not materially affect the overall statement.
In a word: Yes.
… Norm
On Nov 7, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com <mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> wrote:
Hi, All.
Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close.
Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss.
We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc).
Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft.
As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week.
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.
From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com <mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org <mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: Scope document - action needed
Hi, Team.
Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov.
It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items.
Best,
Denise
Denise Michel
Domain Name System Strategy & Management
Facebook, Inc.
denisemichel@fb.com <mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>
<Scope of the Review Draft - Geoff Huston edits.pdf>_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org <mailto:Ssr2-review@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review>
_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org <mailto:Ssr2-review@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review> _______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
Yes
On 8 Nov 2017, at 6:12 am, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Hi, All.
Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close.
Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss.
We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc).
Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft.
As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week.
Thanks. Denise
Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. 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.
From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: Scope document - action needed
Hi, Team.
Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov.
It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items.
Best, Denise
Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com
<Scope of the Review Draft - Geoff Huston edits.pdf>_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
Yes. Yes. -- Boban Krsic Chief Information Security Officer DENIC eG, Kaiserstraße 75-77, 60329 Frankfurt am Main, GERMANY E-Mail: krsic@denic.de, Fon: +49 69 272 35-120, Fax: -248 Mobil: +49 172 67 61 671 https://www.denic.de X.509 Key-ID: 00A54FCB79884413A4 Fingerprint: 9D37 F593 AF9A D766 FAB4 8B88 D49A 2716 PGP Key-ID: 0x43C89BA9 Fingerprint: B974 E725 FEF7 CB3A E452 BEE0 5B80 73E9 43C8 9BA9 Angaben nach § 25a Absatz 1 GenG: DENIC eG (Sitz: Frankfurt am Main) Vorstand: Helga Krüger, Martin Küchenthal, Andreas Musielak, Dr. Jörg Schweiger Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Thomas Keller Eingetragen unter Nr. 770 im Genossenschaftsregister, Amtsgericht Frankfurt am Main -----Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> schrieb: ----- ======================= An: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Von: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Datum: 07.11.2017 20:13 Betreff: Re: [Ssr2-review] Scope document - action needed ======================= Hi, All. Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close. Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss. We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc). Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft. As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week. 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. From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: Scope document - action needed Hi, Team. Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov. It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items. Best, Denise Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com> _______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review [Anhang/Anhänge Scope of the Review Draft - Geoff Huston edits.pdf entfernt von Boban Krsic/Denic]
Yes Regards, Matogoro On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Boban Krsic <krsic@denic.de> wrote:
Yes. Yes.
-- Boban Krsic Chief Information Security Officer
DENIC eG, Kaiserstraße 75-77, 60329 Frankfurt am Main, GERMANY
E-Mail: krsic@denic.de, Fon: +49 69 272 35-120, Fax: -248 Mobil: +49 172 67 61 671 https://www.denic.de
X.509 Key-ID: 00A54FCB79884413A4 Fingerprint: 9D37 F593 AF9A D766 FAB4 8B88 D49A 2716
PGP Key-ID: 0x43C89BA9 Fingerprint: B974 E725 FEF7 CB3A E452 BEE0 5B80 73E9 43C8 9BA9
Angaben nach § 25a Absatz 1 GenG: DENIC eG (Sitz: Frankfurt am Main) Vorstand: Helga Krüger, Martin Küchenthal, Andreas Musielak, Dr. Jörg Schweiger Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Thomas Keller Eingetragen unter Nr. 770 im Genossenschaftsregister, Amtsgericht Frankfurt am Main
-----Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> schrieb: -----
======================= An: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Von: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Datum: 07.11.2017 20:13 Betreff: Re: [Ssr2-review] Scope document - action needed ======================= Hi, All.
Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close.
Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss.
We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc).
Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft.
As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week.
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.
From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: Scope document - action needed
Hi, Team.
Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov.
It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items.
Best, Denise
Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>
_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
[Anhang/Anhänge Scope of the Review Draft - Geoff Huston edits.pdf entfernt von Boban Krsic/Denic] _______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
-- MATOGORO Jabhera Assistant Lecturer & Coordinator - Microsoft Innovation Center, Tanzania College of Informatics and Virtual Education The University of Dodoma (www.udom.ac.tz)
Hi all, I will abstain. I am currently reviewing my ability to continue to serve on the review team, hence my silence in the past days. I will come back with a decision within the next week or so. -James From: ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Denise Michel Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 8:13 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ssr2-review] Scope document - action needed Importance: High Hi, All. Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close. Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss. We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc). Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft. As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week. 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. From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: Scope document - action needed Hi, Team. Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov. It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items. Best, Denise Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>
Hi All, I know I am late but just for the record, I agree with the proposed text. Nevertheless, I have to agree with those who believe that our communication with SO/AC Chairs should be clear and short. At ICAN60, we had meetings where we agreed on the way to overcome this situation, and I do not think there is no need for further clarifications. Zarko From: ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Denise Michel Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 8:13 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ssr2-review] Scope document - action needed Importance: High Hi, All. Included below is the version all Team members were asked to review and indicate whether they can support – deadline today (by 11:30 PM Tuesday, UTC). It includes some edits since we left our last Team meeting in Abu Dhabi, but the focus and substance remains the same. I think we are very close. Please send a yes or no on this draft by the deadline. Let us know if you need more time, or would like to discuss. We’re moving this to the email thread as we’re trying to get closure/agreement on one version of the document (not a changing google doc). Attached is Geoff Huston’s preferred draft. As I noted, we hope to achieve full agreement. Absent that, we continue to operate by consensus and the Scope document will be delivered to the SO & AC chairs this week. 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. From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017 at 3:46 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: Scope document - action needed Hi, Team. Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov. It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items. Best, Denise Denise Michel Domain Name System Strategy & Management Facebook, Inc. denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>
Dear Team, Yes from my side as well. Regards Ram Krishna Pariyar On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Hi, Team.
Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov.
It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items.
Best,
Denise
Denise Michel
Domain Name System Strategy & Management
Facebook, Inc.
*denisemichel@fb.com <denisemichel@fb.com>*
_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
Hi, I will abstain. Regards, Amin On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Ramkrishna Pariyar <ramkrishna@isoc.org.np> wrote:
Dear Team,
Yes from my side as well.
Regards Ram Krishna Pariyar
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> wrote:
Hi, Team.
Thank you for your edits and comments. Please take a look at the draft Scope document on google, and share your final thoughts before 23:30 am UTC Tuesday, 7 Nov.
It seems like we’re close to full agreement but there are a few outstanding items.
Best,
Denise
Denise Michel
Domain Name System Strategy & Management
Facebook, Inc.
*denisemichel@fb.com <denisemichel@fb.com>*
_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
_______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review
participants (12)
-
ALAIN AINA -
Boban Krsic -
Denise Michel -
Don Blumenthal -
Gannon, James-1 -
Geoff Huston -
Matogoro Jabera -
Mohamad Amin hasbini -
Norm Ritchie -
Osterweil, Eric -
Ramkrishna Pariyar -
Žarko Kecić