Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 SO/AC Subgroup Meeting #17 – 19 January 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/baPDAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes (including relevant parts of chat): 0. Call Administration Audio only: no participants - roll call will be taken from AC room. No SOI updates 1. Review of any AI's from call #16 on January 12th @1300 UTC Encourage more participants to volunteer to take part in the drafting team, as there is a lot of work and little time remaining before Copenhagen Very close to receiving additional response from IPC Greg Shatan: IPC response is all but final -- it's being put out for comments by membership for a couple of days and then will be submitted to this august body. 2. Updates Limited updates, suggestion to move to 3rd item of agenda 3. Data Capture documentation of input materials from SOAC's - Methodology review and discuss, desired objectives for this track from the data capture exercise see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OyUsSISvrcvotPpTCSqpAr4iqz7edoyUKPQD0ef-... Farzaneh presented the categories she proposes to organize the data capture documentation. We need to agree on the methodology and start implementing. We have received responses from GNSO, ccNSO, RCC, NCUC, ISPCP, ASO, GAC and SSAC. Only 2 GNSO subgroups have not responded: NCSG and NPOC (Registries and registrars) Some responses are very specific, and others are more general Farzaneh Badii: expectation is to come up with workplan for each SO/AC? or can it just be general? coming up with recommendations for each SO/AC is a very large task, I don't know if we have the means to do that. Greg: I think that rather than customizing recommendations for each SO/AC, we should come up with best practices or overall advice, and it's up to each organization to operationalize these recommendations Alan: each group is unique, I doubt there are going to be many similarities. We can only summarise the responses. Do the responses include a self assessment, or just reflect on facts? Steve DelBianco: What Alan is describing satisfies our charter to "Review". But it does not meet our charter to "develop recommendations to improve processess" Several remarks in the chat in favor of the "best practices" approach. Steve: our initial proposal was to identify unique vs convergent mechanisms. Categorizing mechanisms as best practices is an add-on. Steve DelBianco: Once we have described best practices, our "review" could identify AC/SOs coudl benefit from moving towards the best practices. THAT could be our "recommendation. that is, we compare each AC/SO against the Best Practices, and not against each other Kavouss suggests a linear approach, ie take one question at a time in our next calls and analyze the responses to test the methodology, Steve: if we do that, let's start with an easier question, eg the Transparency question. Kavouss Arasteh: Steve , the easiest question may not represent the methodology to be agreed for difficult question. Cheryl: we shall continue our plee for more volunteers to join the drafting team. Proposed way forward: drafting team to pick 1 question to analyze in our next call. 4. Next Meeting and future Meeting schedule • 26 January @ 13:00 UTC • 02 February @ 19:00 UTC • 09 February @ 05:00 UTC • 16 February @ 13:00 UTC • 02 March @ 05:00 UTC Documents Presented · Data-Capture-Accountability.pdf<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/63153005/Data-Capture-Accou...>