14,952
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − In November 2020, the [[ICANN Board]] approved a recommendation from [[Third Accountability and Transparency Review|ATRT3]] to create a '''Prioritization Framework''' to integrate community, board, and org priorities into annual strategic & budget planning. The prioritization framework was intended to "achiev[e] an agreed upon definition of what it would mean for the prioritization process to “operate by consensus of the individual SO/ACs, Board, and org members that are participating in the prioritization process.”<ref name="atrt3scorecard">[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-atrt3-final-recs-board-action-scorecard-30nov20-en.pdf ICANN.org - Board Resources: ATRT3 Scorecard], November 30, 2020</ref> [[ICANN]]'s [[planning]] department is responsible for facilitating prioritization at an organizational level to ensure that prioritized projects are included the annual Operating and Financial plans.+ − + − + + + Line 40:
Line 42: − ===Pilot===+ − ====Planning Prioritization Group====+ − + Line 56:
Line 58: − + Line 175:
Line 177: − + Line 182:
Line 184: − + Line 189:
Line 191: − + Line 196:
Line 198: − + Line 203:
Line 205: − + Line 210:
Line 212: − + Line 217:
Line 219: − + Line 224:
Line 226: − + Line 231:
Line 233: − + Line 238:
Line 240: − + Line 245:
Line 247: − + Line 252:
Line 254: − + Line 259:
Line 261: − + Line 266:
Line 268: − + Line 273:
Line 275: − + Line 280:
Line 282: − + Line 287:
Line 289: − + Line 294:
Line 296: − + Line 301:
Line 303: − + Line 308:
Line 310: − + Line 315:
Line 317: − + Line 322:
Line 324: − + Line 329:
Line 331: − + Line 336:
Line 338: − + Line 343:
Line 345: − + Line 350:
Line 352: − + Line 357:
Line 359: − + Line 364:
Line 366: − + Line 371:
Line 373: − + Line 378:
Line 380: − + Line 403:
Line 405: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
The '''Prioritization Framework''' is a proposed method for [[ICANN]] to integrate [[ICANN Community|community]], [[ICANN Board|board]], and [[ICANN Organization|org]] priorities into annual strategic & budget planning. The prioritization framework is intended to "achiev[e] an agreed upon definition of what it would mean for the prioritization process to “operate by consensus of the individual SO/ACs, Board, and org members that are participating in the prioritization process.”<ref name="atrt3scorecard">[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-atrt3-final-recs-board-action-scorecard-30nov20-en.pdf ICANN.org - Board Resources: ATRT3 Scorecard], November 30, 2020</ref> [[ICANN]]'s [[planning]] department is responsible for facilitating prioritization at an organizational level to ensure that prioritized projects are included the annual Operating and Financial plans. Prioritization is tracked against the ICANN Strategic Plan to ensue that the prioritization of activities into integrated into the work plan and the highest-priority activities are on the agenda of each Board Workshop.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/chairs-blog-aprilmay-2022-board-workshop-recap-13-05-2022-en Chair’s Blog: April–May 2022 Board Workshop Recap, ICANN Blogs]</ref>
==History==
==Background==
ICANN's [[Multistakeholder Model]] provides for the development of consensus-driven, bottom-up policy and recommendations from the community of stakeholders in the ICANN ecosystem. Over time, the generation of policy proposals, consensus advice, and recommendations has outstripped the ICANN board and orginization's ability to implement such proposals. This has resulted in bottlenecks at the board and org levels around policy implementation: the attention of the board is strained by the number of inputs from constituent bodies; and within the organization, resource limitations make it challenging to respond to all of the mandates generated by board approval of recommendations.<ref name="icann72slides">[https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/13-October-2021+Planning+and+Prioritization+Framework+Design+Update?preview=/176623446/176623447/17-ICANN%2072%20Prep%20Week-%20Planning%20Prioritization%20Framework%20Project%20-10-13-21-%20Final.pdf ICANN 72 Archive - Presentation Slides - Planning Prioritization Framework Project] October 13, 2021</ref>
ICANN's [[Multistakeholder Model]] provides for the development of consensus-driven, bottom-up policy and recommendations from the community of stakeholders in the ICANN ecosystem. Over time, the generation of policy proposals, consensus advice, and recommendations has outstripped the ICANN board and orginization's ability to implement such proposals. This has resulted in bottlenecks at the board and org levels around policy implementation: the attention of the board is strained by the number of inputs from constituent bodies; and within the organization, resource limitations make it challenging to respond to all of the mandates generated by board approval of recommendations.<ref name="icann72slides">[https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/13-October-2021+Planning+and+Prioritization+Framework+Design+Update?preview=/176623446/176623447/17-ICANN%2072%20Prep%20Week-%20Planning%20Prioritization%20Framework%20Project%20-10-13-21-%20Final.pdf ICANN 72 Archive - Presentation Slides - Planning Prioritization Framework Project] October 13, 2021</ref>
The [[Third Accountability and Transparency Review]] made several recommendations regarding the transparency of ICANN's decision-making process, as well as the creation of engagement processes for community-wide concerns. These included a proposed holistic review of ICANN's constituent organizations and re-factoring of existing Organizational Reviews into continuous improvement processes.<ref name="atrt3final">[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf ICANN.org - ATRT 3 Final Report], May 29, 2020</ref> In addition, the review team proposed the creation of a "consensus model" for prioritizing the work of ICANN org and the recommendations derived from [[Policy Development Process|policy development processes]], cross-community working groups, [[ICANN Reviews|organizational and specific reviews]], and other sources.<ref name="atrt3final" />
The [[Third Accountability and Transparency Review]] made several recommendations regarding the transparency of ICANN's decision-making process, as well as the creation of engagement processes for community-wide concerns. These included a proposed holistic review of ICANN's constituent organizations and refactoring of existing Organizational Reviews into continuous improvement processes.<ref name="atrt3final">[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf ICANN.org - ATRT 3 Final Report], May 29, 2020</ref> In addition, the review team proposed the creation of a "consensus model" for prioritizing the work of ICANN org and the recommendations derived from [[Policy Development Process|policy development processes]], cross-community working groups, [[ICANN Reviews|organizational and specific reviews]], and other sources.<ref name="atrt3final" />
In November 2020, the [[ICANN Board]] approved a recommendation from [[Third Accountability and Transparency Review|ATRT3]] to create a Prioritization Framework. At the Board workshop in late April/early May 2022, the board recognized the risk of ICANN being seen as "not getting things done" and reaffirmed the need to deliver on the prioritization efforts.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/chairs-blog-aprilmay-2022-board-workshop-recap-13-05-2022-en Chair’s Blog: April–May 2022 Board Workshop Recap, ICANN Blogs]</ref>
==Project Timeline==
==Project Timeline==
</timeline>
</timeline>
==Pilot==
The prioritization project ran a pilot within the planning process for fiscal year 2023. The pilot will be used to assess the process design and identify improvements. The current plan, subject to process design and consultation, is for the prioritization process to be inserted into the early phases of the strategic and budget planning arc.<ref name="icann72slides" /> The Briefing Paper and the Pilot will both present opportunities for public comment on the process. During [[ICANN 73]]'s Prep Week, the Planning & Prioritization update reported that the briefing paper would be delivered by the end of February 2022. This was later than the initially proposed timeline. The timing of the pilot program timing remained the same.<ref>[https://73.schedule.icann.org/meetings/4drwwSLLyw2tKWTpa ICANN 73 Archive - Planning & Prioritization Update], February 24, 2022 (must be logged in to ICANN account)</ref>
The prioritization project ran a pilot within the planning process for fiscal year 2023. The pilot will be used to assess the process design and identify improvements. The current plan, subject to process design and consultation, is for the prioritization process to be inserted into the early phases of the strategic and budget planning arc.<ref name="icann72slides" /> The Briefing Paper and the Pilot will both present opportunities for public comment on the process. During [[ICANN 73]]'s Prep Week, the Planning & Prioritization update reported that the briefing paper would be delivered by the end of February 2022. This was later than the initially proposed timeline. The timing of the pilot program timing remained the same.<ref>[https://73.schedule.icann.org/meetings/4drwwSLLyw2tKWTpa ICANN 73 Archive - Planning & Prioritization Update], February 24, 2022 (must be logged in to ICANN account)</ref>
The pilot included five sessions in March 2022, during which participants reviewed a list of Board-approved recommendations from [[Specific Reviews]] pending ICANN Org implementation. Each recommendation was evaluated in terms of its levels of urgency and importance. Participants needed to either (#) agree with the prioritization level provided by the org and provide an explanation, or (#) adjust the level of prioritization and explain their reasoning. In early April, the org held a wrap-up session with all of the participants to discuss and identify lessons learned from the pilot for the next version of the framework.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/Planning+Prioritization+Framework+Reference+Documents?preview=/192220493/192220497/Draft%20Planning%20Prioritization%20Framework%20Version%201%20-%20Feb%202022%20(1).pdf PPFramework Draft V.1, Feb 2022, Reference Documents, ICANN Community]</ref>
The pilot included five sessions in March 2022, during which participants reviewed a list of Board-approved recommendations from [[Specific Reviews]] pending ICANN Org implementation. Each recommendation was evaluated in terms of its levels of urgency and importance. Participants needed to either (#) agree with the prioritization level provided by the org and provide an explanation, or (#) adjust the level of prioritization and explain their reasoning. In early April, the org held a wrap-up session with all of the participants to discuss and identify lessons learned from the pilot for the next version of the framework.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/Planning+Prioritization+Framework+Reference+Documents?preview=/192220493/192220497/Draft%20Planning%20Prioritization%20Framework%20Version%201%20-%20Feb%202022%20(1).pdf PPFramework Draft V.1, Feb 2022, Reference Documents, ICANN Community]</ref>
===Planning Prioritization Group===
Planning Prioritization Group (PPG) members were appointed by participating community groups to discuss and agree on a pilot version of prioritizing a list of activities, as described in the Draft Planning Prioritization Framework on 22 February 2022. The group has nine members and nine alternates. One of each from the ASO, ALAC, ccNSO, GAC, RSSAC, and SSAC, and three from the GNSO (one from the CSG, CPH, and NCSG).<ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/Planning+Prioritization+Framework+Reference+Documents?preview=/192220493/192220497/Draft%20Planning%20Prioritization%20Framework%20Version%201%20-%20Feb%202022%20(1).pdf PPFramework Draft V.1, Feb 2022, Reference Documents, ICANN Community]</ref>
Planning Prioritization Group (PPG) members were appointed by participating community groups to discuss and agree on a pilot version of prioritizing a list of activities, as described in the Draft Planning Prioritization Framework on 22 February 2022.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/ICANN+Planning+Prioritization+Framework+Project Planning Prioritization Framework Project, ICANN Community Forum]</ref> The group has nine members and nine alternates. One of each from the ASO, ALAC, ccNSO, GAC, RSSAC, and SSAC, and three from the GNSO (one from the CSG, CPH, and NCSG).<ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/Planning+Prioritization+Framework+Reference+Documents?preview=/192220493/192220497/Draft%20Planning%20Prioritization%20Framework%20Version%201%20-%20Feb%202022%20(1).pdf PPFramework Draft V.1, Feb 2022, Reference Documents, ICANN Community]</ref>
Members include:<ref>[https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=195658174&preview=/195658174/195658188/Planning%20Prioritization%20Pilot%20Meeting%20%233.pdf PPG Pilot Meeting 3, Reference Documents, ICANN Community]</ref>
Members include:<ref>[https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=195658174&preview=/195658174/195658188/Planning%20Prioritization%20Pilot%20Meeting%20%233.pdf PPG Pilot Meeting 3, Reference Documents, ICANN Community]</ref>
* [[ALAC]] M: [[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]], A: [[Jonathan Zuck]]
* [[ALAC]] M: [[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]], A: [[Jonathan Zuck]]
====Recommendations Considered during the Pilot====
====Recommendations Considered during the Pilot====
In total, 45 recommendations were considered during the pilot.<ref>[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HNnH4Wi2wmHqQcQ1hbT0pCY9Mz_moHEIiMvNZtN977U/edit#gid=2036121294 Prioritization Pilot Recommendations Spreadsheet, PPG, ICANN]</ref>
In total, 45 recommendations were considered during the pilot.<ref>[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HNnH4Wi2wmHqQcQ1hbT0pCY9Mz_moHEIiMvNZtN977U/edit#gid=2036121294 Prioritization Pilot Recommendations Spreadsheet, PPG, ICANN]</ref> The finalized list of 2022 priorities was published on May 23, 2022.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/icann-fy23-and-fy24-planning-process-update-23-05-2022-en ICANN FY23/24 Priorities Process, Blogs, ICANN]</ref>
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold; background-color:#FCE5CD;"
|- style="font-weight:bold; background-color:#FCE5CD;"
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1
| style="text-align:left;" | needs to be run as a pilot first, to be designed with the community.
| style="text-align:left;" | needs to be run as a pilot first, to be designed with the community.
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1
| style="background-color:#FF0; text-align:left;" | obtained consensus on "Importance"; not yet obtained consensus on "Urgency" <br />- 13 Apr 2022
| style="background-color:#FF0; text-align:left;" | obtained consensus on "Importance"; not yet obtained consensus on "Urgency" <br />- 13 Apr 2022
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1
| style="text-align:left;" | New review/program to be designed with each individual [[SO]]/[[AC]]/[[NomCom|NC]]
| style="text-align:left;" | New review/program to be designed with each individual [[SO]]/[[AC]]/[[NomCom|NC]]
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FF0; text-align:left;" | obtained consensus on "Importance"; not yet obtained consensus on "Urgency" <br />- 19 Apr 2022
| style="background-color:#FF0; text-align:left;" | obtained consensus on "Importance"; not yet obtained consensus on "Urgency" <br />- 19 Apr 2022
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1
| style="text-align:left;" | This recommendation about [[RDAP]] is rated by the RDS-WHOIS2 as high.
| style="text-align:left;" | This recommendation about [[RDAP]] is rated by the RDS-WHOIS2 as high.
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FF0; text-align:left;" | skip for now due to lack of information<br />- 19 April 2022
| style="background-color:#FF0; text-align:left;" | skip for now due to lack of information<br />- 19 April 2022
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | fold into a voluntary pilot survey of [[CPH|contracted parties]].
| style="text-align:left;" | fold into a voluntary pilot survey of [[CPH|contracted parties]].
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8; text-align:left;" |
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8; text-align:left;" |
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | rated by the CCT-RT as high.
| style="text-align:left;" | rated by the CCT-RT as high.
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | included in the next round of contractual negotiations with the contracted parties
| style="text-align:left;" | included in the next round of contractual negotiations with the contracted parties
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by SSR2 as a medium priority
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by SSR2 as a medium priority
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by CCT-RT as a low priority
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by CCT-RT as a low priority
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by CCT-RT as a low priority
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by CCT-RT as a low priority
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | May include dependencies on [[Expedited Policy Development Process on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data|EPDP related work]]
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | May include dependencies on [[Expedited Policy Development Process on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data|EPDP related work]]
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | Dependent on completion on SSR2 Review Rec 23.2.
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | Dependent on completion on SSR2 Review Rec 23.2.
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | implemented in 2021
| style="text-align:left;" | implemented in 2021
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by ATRT3 as a low priority
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by ATRT3 as a low priority
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | Work is underway to determine which measures are needed to ensure that appropriate information on Caucus group activities is provided to the community.
| style="text-align:left;" | Work is underway to determine which measures are needed to ensure that appropriate information on Caucus group activities is provided to the community.
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | Updates to web documentation were made - action needed on the need to include users/focus groups.
| style="text-align:left;" | Updates to web documentation were made - action needed on the need to include users/focus groups.
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | ICANN org conducted a study on the topic of [[Expedited Policy Development Process on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data#EPDP Phase 2A|differentiation of legal vs. natural persons' registration data]]; two surveys on the Standardized System for Access and Disclosure ([[SSAD]]) Operational Design Phase ([[ODP]]). ICANN org is working on streamlined [[AC#Procedure and Process|mechanisms to request, receive, and gather feedback]] from the community and stakeholders
| style="text-align:left;" | ICANN org conducted a study on the topic of [[Expedited Policy Development Process on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data#EPDP Phase 2A|differentiation of legal vs. natural persons' registration data]]; two surveys on the Standardized System for Access and Disclosure ([[SSAD]]) Operational Design Phase ([[ODP]]). ICANN org is working on streamlined [[AC#Procedure and Process|mechanisms to request, receive, and gather feedback]] from the community and stakeholders
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | already implemented or need to be retired due to Internet landscape changes
| style="text-align:left;" | already implemented or need to be retired due to Internet landscape changes
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by SSR2 as a low priority
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by SSR2 as a low priority
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | determined by SSR2 as a low priority
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | determined by SSR2 as a low priority
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|-
|-
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="text-align:left;" | implemented as part of [[Information Transparency Initiative]]
| style="text-align:left;" | implemented as part of [[Information Transparency Initiative]]
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | TBD
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" |
|}
|}
** ICANN Org and [[PTI]] operations should accelerate the implementation of new Root Zone Management System (RZMS) security measures regarding the authentication and authorization of requested changes and offer TLD operators the opportunity to take advantage of those security measures, particularly MFA and encrypted email.
** ICANN Org and [[PTI]] operations should accelerate the implementation of new Root Zone Management System (RZMS) security measures regarding the authentication and authorization of requested changes and offer TLD operators the opportunity to take advantage of those security measures, particularly MFA and encrypted email.
=====Pilot Results=====
As of May 2022, all 45 recommendations had been considered.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=197264210&preview=%2F197264210%2F197264211%2FPlanning+Prioritization+Pilot+Meeting+%235.pdf PPG Meeting 5 Documents, ICANN Community Forum]</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Review
! P1
! P2
! P3
! P4
! Open
! Total
|-
| style="font-weight:bold;" | ATRT3
| 3
| 7
|
|
| 3
| 13
|-
| style="font-weight:bold;" | CCT
| 4
| 10
|
| 1
|
| 15
|-
| style="font-weight:bold;" | RDS-WHOIS2
|
| 1
|
| 1
| 6
| 8
|-
| style="font-weight:bold;" | SSR2
| 3
|
| 2
|
| 4
| 9
|-
| style="font-weight:bold;" | Total
| 10
| 18
| 2
| 2
| 15
| 45
|}
==Prioritization in Reality==
At [[ICANN 74]], ICANN Org and the board asked the community which the org should prioritize, [[SSAD]] Light or the [[SubPro]] [[ODA]]. In response, the [[GNSO Council]] sent a letter to the board on July 5, highlighting the importance of both projects and saying to do both in parallel.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/fouquart-to-botterman-05jul22-en.pdf RE: Status Update EPDP Phase 2 and Review of the Operational Design Assessment, GNSO Council to ICANN Board]</ref> The org expects the latest version of the SSAD Light to be completed by ICANN 75 and the Subpro ODA to be completed by December 12, 2022.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/icann-moves-ahead-on-subpro-odp-and-whois-disclosure-system-design-initiatives-14-07-2022-en ICANN Moves Ahead on SubPro ODP and WHOIS Disclosure System Design Initiatives, Blogs, ICANN]</ref>
==References==
==References==
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Frameworks]]
[[Category:Frameworks]]
[[Category:Concepts]]