Prioritization Framework: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
(11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
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> | |||
== | ==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 | 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== | ||
Line 40: | Line 42: | ||
</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]] | ||
Line 56: | Line 58: | ||
====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;" | ||
Line 63: | Line 65: | ||
! style="background-color:#D9EAD3;" | ICANN Org Priority Level <br />P1 = highest priority<br />P4 = lowest priority | ! style="background-color:#D9EAD3;" | ICANN Org Priority Level <br />P1 = highest priority<br />P4 = lowest priority | ||
! style="background-color:#D9EAD3;" | Rationale | ! style="background-color:#D9EAD3;" | Rationale | ||
! ICANN COMMUNITY PPG Priority Level P1 = highest priority<br />P4 = lowest priority | ! ICANN COMMUNITY PPG Priority Level P1 = highest priority<br />P4 = lowest priority | ||
! Rationale | ! Rationale | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[ATRT3]] | | [[Third Accountability and Transparency Review|ATRT3]] | ||
| Rec 3.1-3.4 - Periodic and Organizational Reviews | | Rec 3.1-3.4 - Periodic and Organizational Reviews | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | Based on the current [[ICANN Bylaws]] requirement, the next [[RDS Review]] (RDS3) is in Sep 2023, but all further RDS review should be suspended for now. | | style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | Based on the current [[ICANN Bylaws]] requirement, the next [[Second Registration Directory Service Review|RDS Review]] (RDS3) is in Sep 2023, but all further RDS review should be suspended for now. | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 13 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 13 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 81: | Line 79: | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | Redesigns the process of reviews. | | style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | Redesigns the process of reviews. | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 13 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 13 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 90: | Line 86: | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | Requires [[ICANN Board]] action and differs from what is currently stated in the ByLaws. | | style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | Requires [[ICANN Board]] action and differs from what is currently stated in the ByLaws. | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 13 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 13 Apr 2022 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[CCT]] | | [[First Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review|CCT]] | ||
| Recommendation 1 | | Recommendation 1 | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | Essential to have a framework in place for data collection | | style="text-align:left;" | Essential to have a framework in place for data collection | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 108: | Line 100: | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | Recommendations 8, 11, 13 items 1, 2, 4 to be handled in a single implementation. Recommendation 11 is a prerequisite | | style="text-align:left;" | Recommendations 8, 11, 13 items 1, 2, 4 to be handled in a single implementation. Recommendation 11 is a prerequisite | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 117: | Line 107: | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 126: | Line 114: | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[SSR2]] | | [[Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency Review|SSR2]] | ||
| Rec 10.1 | | Rec 10.1 | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | need a common community understanding of what is [[DNS Abuse]] and [[cybercrime|related terms]] | | style="background-color:#FFF; text-align:left;" | need a common community understanding of what is [[DNS Abuse]] and [[cybercrime|related terms]] | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 144: | Line 128: | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | Efforts to implement the new [[Root Zone]] Management System are already underway. This recommendation will build on existing efforts to enhance security in the<br />Root Zone System. | | style="text-align:left;" | Efforts to implement the new [[Root Zone]] Management System are already underway. This recommendation will build on existing efforts to enhance security in the<br />Root Zone System. | ||
| style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agreed<br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 153: | Line 135: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | Need time to develop template and structure for this new reporting rerquirement | | style="text-align:left;" | Need time to develop template and structure for this new reporting rerquirement | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 162: | Line 142: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 171: | Line 149: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 180: | Line 156: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 189: | Line 163: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. <br />- 19 Apr 2022 | ||
Line 198: | Line 170: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | determined by CCT-RT to be a high priority | | style="text-align:left;" | determined by CCT-RT to be a high priority | ||
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | - 19 April 2022 | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | - 19 April 2022 | ||
Line 207: | Line 177: | ||
| 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:# | | 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 | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 216: | Line 184: | ||
| 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:# | | 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 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[RDS-WHOIS2]] | | [[Second Registration Directory Service Review|RDS-WHOIS2]] | ||
| R11.2 | | R11.2 | ||
| 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:# | | 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 | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 233: | Line 197: | ||
| Recommendation 13 - item 4 (in part), 5 | | Recommendation 13 - item 4 (in part), 5 | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | fold into a voluntary pilot survey of [[ | | style="text-align:left;" | fold into a voluntary pilot survey of [[CPH|contracted parties]]. | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 243: | Line 205: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 252: | Line 212: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 261: | Line 219: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 270: | Line 226: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 279: | Line 233: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 288: | Line 240: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 297: | Line 247: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 306: | Line 254: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 315: | Line 261: | ||
| style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 324: | Line 268: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#E06666;" | P1 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 333: | Line 275: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 342: | Line 282: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 350: | Line 288: | ||
| Rec 16.1 | | Rec 16.1 | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 360: | Line 296: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#C9DAF8;" | P3 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 369: | Line 303: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 378: | Line 310: | ||
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#B6D7A8;" | P2 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 387: | Line 317: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 396: | Line 324: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 405: | Line 331: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 414: | Line 338: | ||
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 423: | Line 345: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 432: | Line 352: | ||
| style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="text-align:left;" | ditto | | style="text-align:left;" | ditto | ||
| style="background-color:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 441: | Line 359: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 450: | Line 366: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 459: | Line 373: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 468: | Line 380: | ||
| 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:# | | style="background-color:#FFF2CC;" | P4 | ||
| style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | | style="background-color:#FCE5CD; text-align:left;" | | ||
|} | |} | ||
=====Priority Level 1===== | =====Priority Level 1===== | ||
As of April 2022, the [[ICANN Community]] PPG has listed the following recommendations as priority level 1:<ref>[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HNnH4Wi2wmHqQcQ1hbT0pCY9Mz_moHEIiMvNZtN977U/edit#gid=2036121294 Prioritization Pilot Recommendations Spreadsheet, PPG, ICANN]</ref> | |||
* Recs 3.1-3.4 from the ATRT3: | * Recs 3.1-3.4 from the ATRT3: | ||
** Suspend RDS reviews | ** Suspend RDS reviews | ||
Line 494: | Line 405: | ||
** 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]] |
Latest revision as of 16:35, 15 July 2022
The Prioritization Framework is a proposed method for ICANN to integrate community, board, and 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.”[1] 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.[2]
Background[edit | edit source]
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.[3]
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.[4] 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 processes, cross-community working groups, organizational and specific reviews, and other sources.[4]
In November 2020, the ICANN Board approved a recommendation from 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.[5]
Project Timeline[edit | edit source]
<timeline>
- All measures are in pixels
ImageSize = width:900 height:auto barincrement:40 PlotArea = left:20 right:20 bottom:20 top:20 AlignBars = justify
DateFormat = mm/dd/yyyy Period = from:04/01/2021 till:01/31/2023 TimeAxis = orientation:horizontal Colors =
id:grid value:rgb(0.9,0.9,0.9)
Define $dx = 60
BarData=
Barset:Phases
PlotData=
align:left textcolor:black fontsize:M mark:(line,black) width:15 barset:Phases color:yellowgreen at:04/27/2021 shift:(8,-5) text:2021 - Project Launch Webinar from:06/01/2021 till:10/31/2021 shift:(125,-5) text:"June-October 2021 ~Consultation Phase with Community & Board" at:06/02/2021 shift:(8,-5) text:2021 - ICANN 71 Planning & Finance Update at:10/13/2021 shift:(8,-5) text:72 Planning & Prioritization Update from:11/01/2021 till:02/28/2022 shift:(90,-5) text:"November 2021-February 2022 ~Drafting & Publication of Briefing Paper" at:02/24/2022 shift:(8,-5) text:73 Planning & Prioritization Update from:03/01/2022 till:04/30/2022 shift:($dx,-5) text:"March-April 2022 ~Prioritization Process Pilot" from:05/01/2022 till:06/30/2022 shift:($dx,-5) text:"May-June 2022 ~Adjustments to Framework" at:01/01/2023 shift:(8,-5) text:"FY 2024~Launch"
</timeline>
Pilot[edit | edit source]
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.[3] 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.[6] 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.[7]
Planning Prioritization Group[edit | edit source]
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.[8] 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).[9] Members include:[10]
- ALAC M: Cheryl Langdon-Orr, A: Jonathan Zuck
- ccNSO M: Chris Disspain, A: Irina Danelia
- GAC M: Susan Chalmers, A: Manal Ismail
- GNSO (CPH) M: Donna Austin, A: Jothan Frakes
- (CSG) M: Susan Payne, A: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
- (NCSG) M: Rafik Dammak, A: Dr A M Sudhakara
- RSSAC M: Ken Renard, N.A.
- SSAC M: Barry Leiba, A: Chris Roosenraad
Recommendations Considered during the Pilot[edit | edit source]
In total, 45 recommendations were considered during the pilot.[11] The finalized list of 2022 priorities was published on May 23, 2022.[12]
Specific Reviews | Recommendation | ICANN Org Priority Level P1 = highest priority P4 = lowest priority |
Rationale | ICANN COMMUNITY PPG Priority Level P1 = highest priority P4 = lowest priority |
Rationale |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ATRT3 | Rec 3.1-3.4 - Periodic and Organizational Reviews | P1 | Based on the current ICANN Bylaws requirement, the next RDS Review (RDS3) is in Sep 2023, but all further RDS review should be suspended for now. | P1 | Agreed - 13 Apr 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 3.1-3.4 - Periodic and Organizational Reviews | P1 | Redesigns the process of reviews. | P1 | Agreed - 13 Apr 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 3.1-3.4 - Periodic and Organizational Reviews | P1 | Requires ICANN Board action and differs from what is currently stated in the ByLaws. | P1 | Agreed - 13 Apr 2022 |
CCT | Recommendation 1 | P1 | Essential to have a framework in place for data collection | P1 | Agreed - 19 Apr 2022 |
CCT | Recommendation 8 | P1 | Recommendations 8, 11, 13 items 1, 2, 4 to be handled in a single implementation. Recommendation 11 is a prerequisite | P1 | Agreed - 19 Apr 2022 |
CCT | Recommendation 11 | P1 | ditto | P1 | Agreed - 19 Apr 2022 |
CCT | Recommendation 13 - items 1, 2, 4 | P1 | ditto | P1 | Agreed - 19 Apr 2022 |
SSR2 | Rec 10.1 | P1 | need a common community understanding of what is DNS Abuse and related terms | P1 | Agreed - 19 Apr 2022 |
SSR2 | Rec 21.1 | P1 | Efforts to implement the new Root Zone Management System are already underway. This recommendation will build on existing efforts to enhance security in the Root Zone System. |
P1 | Agreed - 19 Apr 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 4 - Strategic and Operational Plans | P2 | Need time to develop template and structure for this new reporting rerquirement | P2 | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. - 19 Apr 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 4 - Strategic and Operational Plans | P2 | ditto | P2 | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. - 19 Apr 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 4 - Strategic and Operational Plans | P2 | ditto | P2 | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. - 19 Apr 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 4 - Strategic and Operational Plans | P2 | ditto | P2 | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. - 19 Apr 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 4 - Strategic and Operational Plans | P2 | ditto | P2 | Agree with ICANN org pre assessment. - 19 Apr 2022 |
CCT | Recommendation 7 | P2 | determined by CCT-RT to be a high priority | P4 | - 19 April 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 3.5 - Holistic Review | P1 | needs to be run as a pilot first, to be designed with the community. | P1 | obtained consensus on "Importance"; not yet obtained consensus on "Urgency" - 13 Apr 2022 |
ATRT3 | Rec 3.6 - Continuous Improvement Program | P1 | New review/program to be designed with each individual SO/AC/NC | P2 | obtained consensus on "Importance"; not yet obtained consensus on "Urgency" - 19 Apr 2022 |
RDS-WHOIS2 | R11.2 | P1 | This recommendation about RDAP is rated by the RDS-WHOIS2 as high. | P2 | skip for now due to lack of information - 19 April 2022 |
CCT | Recommendation 13 - item 4 (in part), 5 | P2 | fold into a voluntary pilot survey of contracted parties. | P2 | |
CCT | Recommendation 20 | ditto | P2 | ||
CCT | Recommendation 23 Items A, C (in part) & D | P2 | ditto | P2 | |
CCT | Recommendation 24 B | P2 | ditto | P2 | |
CCT | Recommendation 23 Item B | ditto | P2 | ||
CCT | Recommendation 21 item 2 | P2 | rated by the CCT-RT as high. | P2 | |
CCT | Recommendation 22 | P2 | ditto | P2 | |
CCT | Recommendation 26 | P2 | ditto | P2 | |
RDS-WHOIS2 | SG.1 | P2 | included in the next round of contractual negotiations with the contracted parties | P2 | |
RDS-WHOIS2 | CC.1 | P2 | ditto | P4 | |
SSR2 | Rec 23.2 | P2 | determined by SSR2 as a medium priority | P1 | |
CCT | Recommendation 6 | P3 | determined by CCT-RT as a low priority | P2 | |
CCT | Recommendation 13 - item 3 | P3 | determined by CCT-RT as a low priority | P2 | |
SSR2 | Rec 16.1 | P3 | May include dependencies on EPDP related work | P3 | |
SSR2 | Rec 23.1 | P3 | Dependent on completion on SSR2 Review Rec 23.2. | P3 | |
ATRT3 | Rec 1 - Public Input | P4 | implemented in 2021 | P2 | |
ATRT3 | Rec 1 - Public Input | P4 | ditto | P2 | |
ATRT3 | Rec 2 - Implementation of ATRT2 Recommendations | P4 | determined by ATRT3 as a low priority | P4 | |
RDS-WHOIS2 | R1.3 | P4 | Work is underway to determine which measures are needed to ensure that appropriate information on Caucus group activities is provided to the community. | P4 | |
RDS-WHOIS2 | R3.1 | P4 | Updates to web documentation were made - action needed on the need to include users/focus groups. | P4 | |
RDS-WHOIS2 | R15.1 | P4 | ditto | P4 | |
RDS-WHOIS2 | LE.1 | P4 | ICANN org conducted a study on the topic of 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 mechanisms to request, receive, and gather feedback from the community and stakeholders | P4 | |
RDS-WHOIS2 | LE.2 | P4 | ditto | P4 | |
SSR2 | Rec 1.1 | P4 | already implemented or need to be retired due to Internet landscape changes | P4 | |
SSR2 | Rec 22.1 | P4 | determined by SSR2 as a low priority | P4 | |
SSR2 | Rec 22.2 | P4 | determined by SSR2 as a low priority | P4 | |
SSR2 | Rec 24.2 | P4 | implemented as part of Information Transparency Initiative | P4 |
Priority Level 1[edit | edit source]
As of April 2022, the ICANN Community PPG has listed the following recommendations as priority level 1:[13]
- Recs 3.1-3.4 from the ATRT3:
- Suspend RDS reviews
- One clearly scoped CCT Review that starts two years after the next round of new gTLDs and lasts one year. A framework of data collection must precede the next round of gTLDs prior to review member selection
- ATRT Reviews should continue but shall start no later than two years after the approval by the Board of the first recommendation of the Holistic Review; recommend whether the Board should terminate or amend other periodic reviews or create periodic reviews; all documentation required for the review shall be available at the first meeting of the review team when terms of reference shall be established.
- Recs 1, 8, 11, and 13.1,2,4 from the CCT:
- Formalize and promote ongoing data collection.
- Conduct periodic surveys of registrants that gather both objective and subjective information to create more concrete, actionable information.
- Conduct periodic end-user consumer surveys with more behavioral measures of consumer trust toward generating more concrete, actionable information.
- Collect data on the impact of restrictions on who can buy domains within certain new gTLDs (registration restrictions) to help regularly determine and report:
- Whether consumers and registrants are aware that certain new gTLDs have registration restrictions;
- Compare consumer trust levels between new gTLDs with varying degrees of registration restrictions;
- Assess the costs and benefits of registration restrictions to the public (to include impacts on competition and consumer choice)
- Recs 10.1 and 21.1 from the SSR2:
- ICANN org should post a web page that:
- includes their working definitions of DNS Abuse for projects, documents, and contracts. The definition should explicitly note what types of security threats ICANN org currently considers within (and outside) its remit to address through contractual and compliance mechanisms
- Explains the difference between DNS Abuse and security threats and malicious conduct
- list all current abuse-related obligations in contracts with contracted parties, including any procedures and protocols for responding to abuse
- updates annually, date the latest version, and link to older versions with associated dates of publication
- 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 should post a web page that:
Pilot Results[edit | edit source]
As of May 2022, all 45 recommendations had been considered.[14]
Review | P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | Open | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ATRT3 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 13 | ||
CCT | 4 | 10 | 1 | 15 | ||
RDS-WHOIS2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 8 | ||
SSR2 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 9 | ||
Total | 10 | 18 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 45 |
Prioritization in Reality[edit | edit source]
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.[15] 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.[16]
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ ICANN.org - Board Resources: ATRT3 Scorecard, November 30, 2020
- ↑ Chair’s Blog: April–May 2022 Board Workshop Recap, ICANN Blogs
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 ICANN 72 Archive - Presentation Slides - Planning Prioritization Framework Project October 13, 2021
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 ICANN.org - ATRT 3 Final Report, May 29, 2020
- ↑ Chair’s Blog: April–May 2022 Board Workshop Recap, ICANN Blogs
- ↑ ICANN 73 Archive - Planning & Prioritization Update, February 24, 2022 (must be logged in to ICANN account)
- ↑ PPFramework Draft V.1, Feb 2022, Reference Documents, ICANN Community
- ↑ Planning Prioritization Framework Project, ICANN Community Forum
- ↑ PPFramework Draft V.1, Feb 2022, Reference Documents, ICANN Community
- ↑ PPG Pilot Meeting 3, Reference Documents, ICANN Community
- ↑ Prioritization Pilot Recommendations Spreadsheet, PPG, ICANN
- ↑ ICANN FY23/24 Priorities Process, Blogs, ICANN
- ↑ Prioritization Pilot Recommendations Spreadsheet, PPG, ICANN
- ↑ PPG Meeting 5 Documents, ICANN Community Forum
- ↑ RE: Status Update EPDP Phase 2 and Review of the Operational Design Assessment, GNSO Council to ICANN Board
- ↑ ICANN Moves Ahead on SubPro ODP and WHOIS Disclosure System Design Initiatives, Blogs, ICANN