3,197
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Operating Standards for Specific Reviews (view source)
Revision as of 23:40, 12 July 2021
, 3 years agoCreated page with "The '''Operating Standards for Specific Reviews''' were produced by ICANN org through public consultation between 2016 and 2019.<ref name="oswiki">[https://community.icann.org..."
The '''Operating Standards for Specific Reviews''' were produced by ICANN org through public consultation between 2016 and 2019.<ref name="oswiki">[https://community.icann.org/display/OSFR Operating Standards for Reviews Workspace]</ref> The [[ICANN Board]] approved the [https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/operating-standards-specific-reviews-23jun19-en.pdf final version] of the operating standards in June 2019<ref name="ossr">[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/operating-standards-specific-reviews-23jun19-en.pdf Operating Standards for Specific Reviews], June 23, 2019</ref>
==Background==
[[ICANN Reviews#Specific Reviews|Specific Reviews]] were introduced as a result of the [[Affirmation of Commitments]] (AoC) between ICANN and the [[United States Department of Commerce]]. The "specific commitments" of the AoC each became the subject of a review:
*Accountability and Transparency (ATRT) - focused on ICANN operations<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/atrt ICANN.org - Accountability & Transparency Review]</ref>
*Security, Stability, & Resiliency (SSR) - focused on the DNS<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/ssr ICANN.org - Security, Stability, & Resiliency Review]</ref>
*Registration Directory Service (RDS/WHOIS) - focused on registration data and public access to registration information<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/whois ICANN.org - Registration Directory Service Review]</ref>
*Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice (CCT) - ushered in as part of the [[New gTLD Program]], this review is focused on the domain marketplace and the experience of registrants and other consumers<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/cct ICANN.org - Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice]</ref>
In October 2016, the ICANN Board approved an amendment to the [[ICANN Bylaws]] that codified Specific Reviews in Article 4.6.<ref name="bylaws46"]<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article4.6 ICANN Bylaws - Article 4, Section 4.6 - Specific Reviews], as amended July 2021</ref> Article 4.6 requires that the operating standards for specific reviews "shall be developed through community consultation, including public comment opportunities as necessary that comply with the designated practice for public comment periods within ICANN."<ref name="bylaws46" /> It also provides some foundational guidelines for the review process, selection of SO/AC representatives, diversity and representation of all interests, and other baseline operating standards.<ref name="bylaws46" /> The Operating Standards for Reviews project was launched by ICANN org shortly after the addition of Article 4.6 to the Bylaws.<ref name="oswiki" />
==Community Consultation and Drafting Process==
===ICANN 57===
[[Lars Hoffman]] hosted an open session at [[ICANN 57]] in Hyderabad to "...contin[ue]...a dialogue that started during the drafting of the new Bylaws."<ref name="icann57">[https://icann572016.sched.com/event/8czm/operating-standards-workshop-to-socialize-with-community ICANN 57 Archive - Operating Standards Workshop to Socialize with the Community], November 5, 2016</ref> His presentation included a skeleton draft of an operating standards document.<ref name="skeleton">[https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/63145910/Operating%20Standards%20_%20skeleton.pdf Operating Standards for Reviews Workspace - Operating Standards Skeleton], October 27, 2016</ref> The draft proposed a number of questions for the workshop to consider:
* How should the SO/AC Chairs’ selection process work in detail, to assure efficient proceedings, while adhering to all Bylaw requirements?
* How to assure diversity in Review Teams?
* How to integrate newcomers into reviews?
* How to assure that subparts of SO/ACs (AT-Large regions, GNSO SG/Cs, etc.) are all adequately represented across different reviews?
* How do we ensure institutional experience between different reviews whilst assuring to recruit new members to future Review Teams?
* How to include non-affiliated subject matter experts in the selection process for Review Teams?
* Who should be allowed to propose changes to the operating procedures once they are in place?
* What procedure should be in place to amend the operating procedures once they are in place?
The workshop
==References==
{{reflist}}
__NOTOC__
[[Category:Specific Reviews]]
==Background==
[[ICANN Reviews#Specific Reviews|Specific Reviews]] were introduced as a result of the [[Affirmation of Commitments]] (AoC) between ICANN and the [[United States Department of Commerce]]. The "specific commitments" of the AoC each became the subject of a review:
*Accountability and Transparency (ATRT) - focused on ICANN operations<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/atrt ICANN.org - Accountability & Transparency Review]</ref>
*Security, Stability, & Resiliency (SSR) - focused on the DNS<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/ssr ICANN.org - Security, Stability, & Resiliency Review]</ref>
*Registration Directory Service (RDS/WHOIS) - focused on registration data and public access to registration information<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/whois ICANN.org - Registration Directory Service Review]</ref>
*Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice (CCT) - ushered in as part of the [[New gTLD Program]], this review is focused on the domain marketplace and the experience of registrants and other consumers<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/specific-reviews/cct ICANN.org - Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice]</ref>
In October 2016, the ICANN Board approved an amendment to the [[ICANN Bylaws]] that codified Specific Reviews in Article 4.6.<ref name="bylaws46"]<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article4.6 ICANN Bylaws - Article 4, Section 4.6 - Specific Reviews], as amended July 2021</ref> Article 4.6 requires that the operating standards for specific reviews "shall be developed through community consultation, including public comment opportunities as necessary that comply with the designated practice for public comment periods within ICANN."<ref name="bylaws46" /> It also provides some foundational guidelines for the review process, selection of SO/AC representatives, diversity and representation of all interests, and other baseline operating standards.<ref name="bylaws46" /> The Operating Standards for Reviews project was launched by ICANN org shortly after the addition of Article 4.6 to the Bylaws.<ref name="oswiki" />
==Community Consultation and Drafting Process==
===ICANN 57===
[[Lars Hoffman]] hosted an open session at [[ICANN 57]] in Hyderabad to "...contin[ue]...a dialogue that started during the drafting of the new Bylaws."<ref name="icann57">[https://icann572016.sched.com/event/8czm/operating-standards-workshop-to-socialize-with-community ICANN 57 Archive - Operating Standards Workshop to Socialize with the Community], November 5, 2016</ref> His presentation included a skeleton draft of an operating standards document.<ref name="skeleton">[https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/63145910/Operating%20Standards%20_%20skeleton.pdf Operating Standards for Reviews Workspace - Operating Standards Skeleton], October 27, 2016</ref> The draft proposed a number of questions for the workshop to consider:
* How should the SO/AC Chairs’ selection process work in detail, to assure efficient proceedings, while adhering to all Bylaw requirements?
* How to assure diversity in Review Teams?
* How to integrate newcomers into reviews?
* How to assure that subparts of SO/ACs (AT-Large regions, GNSO SG/Cs, etc.) are all adequately represented across different reviews?
* How do we ensure institutional experience between different reviews whilst assuring to recruit new members to future Review Teams?
* How to include non-affiliated subject matter experts in the selection process for Review Teams?
* Who should be allowed to propose changes to the operating procedures once they are in place?
* What procedure should be in place to amend the operating procedures once they are in place?
The workshop
==References==
{{reflist}}
__NOTOC__
[[Category:Specific Reviews]]