Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency Review: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 279: | Line 279: | ||
* ''Some recommendations contemplate that the ICANN Board or ICANN org should unilaterally develop policy outside of the GNSO Council’s Policy Development Process.'' This was also noted during the public comment period by RySG, RrSG, and PIR, along with prominent contracted parties [[Tucows]] and [[Namecheap]]. | * ''Some recommendations contemplate that the ICANN Board or ICANN org should unilaterally develop policy outside of the GNSO Council’s Policy Development Process.'' This was also noted during the public comment period by RySG, RrSG, and PIR, along with prominent contracted parties [[Tucows]] and [[Namecheap]]. | ||
* ''Some recommendations do not clearly address a fact-based problem, or articulate what cost/benefit would be derived or how the desired outcome envisioned by the Review Team would add value and improve security, stability, and resiliency.'' Echoing a common tension between technical attitudes toward security, stability, and resiliency on the one hand, and socially-oriented, policy advocacy stances on the other, the board reiterated its own comments to the previous output of the SSR2 team. Citing both the [[Operating Standards for Specific Reviews]] and the conversations held in the development of the [[Resourcing and Prioritization of Community Recommendations]] draft proposal for community discussion, the board repeated the importance of well-crafted, fact-based recommendations that could articulate specific benefits to the stability, security, and resiliency of the DNS.<ref name="rationale" /> | * ''Some recommendations do not clearly address a fact-based problem, or articulate what cost/benefit would be derived or how the desired outcome envisioned by the Review Team would add value and improve security, stability, and resiliency.'' Echoing a common tension between technical attitudes toward security, stability, and resiliency on the one hand, and socially-oriented, policy advocacy stances on the other, the board reiterated its own comments to the previous output of the SSR2 team. Citing both the [[Operating Standards for Specific Reviews]] and the conversations held in the development of the [[Resourcing and Prioritization of Community Recommendations]] draft proposal for community discussion, the board repeated the importance of well-crafted, fact-based recommendations that could articulate specific benefits to the stability, security, and resiliency of the DNS.<ref name="rationale" /> | ||
===Implementation Planning Phase=== | |||
An ICANN Board Caucus has met with the SSR2 implementation shepherds twice as of December 2021.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/SSR/SSR2+Implementation+Shepherds SSR2 Workspace - Implementation Shepherds], last updated October 27, 2021</ref> At its September meeting, [[Danko Jevtovic]] reiterated the Board's commitment to grow its understanding of the review team's recommendations as well as inform and educate the implementation shepherds regarding what is possible.<ref name="septcaucus">[https://icann.zoom.us/rec/play/2kLmaNXcxkb596NJw5jXge1mBQmSbVU6GVnCKqdQ_p53J4aKbFW1NoSVH07A1RGaGBu83fFtXJ7NW--s.GPD82qxnW0dLgBiF?startTime=1632927768000 ICANN Zoom Archives - Board Caucus Meeting with SSR2 Implementation Shepherds], September 29, 2021 (must be logged into Zoom - passcode for meeting is FH3Qc?tC.Q</ref> | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||