2022-02-09 EPDP Phase 2 Small Team to review the SSAD ODA - Meeting #01

Notes/ Action Items

SSAD ODP Council Small Team – Meeting #1 – Wednesday, 9 February 2022

1. Welcome & introductions
2. Review of small team assignment (see here) 

The small team is expected to consider the concerns outlined in the ICANN Board letter and with these concerns in mind analyze the SSAD ODA and provide the Council with its feedback on:

• Whether the ODA has correctly interpreted the intent of the SSAD recommendations in the proposed implementation;
• Whether the ODA has overlooked any key aspects of the SSAD recommendations that should be factored in by the ICANN Board when it considers the recommendations;
• Its view on the concerns identified by the ICANN Board and potential options that could be considered, either in the form of changes to the proposed implementation or the policy recommendations themselves, to address these concerns (note, these are expected to be high level suggestions at this stage);
• Any other aspects that help inform the Council’s deliberations and consultation with the ICANN Board.

Procedural options:

     a. ICANN Board adopts the recommendations – No role for the GNSO Council

     b. The ICANN Board determines that the adoption of the recommendation is not in the best interest of the ICANN community or ICANN – GNSO Council requested to affirm or modify its recommendations in the form of a “Supplemental Recommendation”

     c. GNSO Council decides to make amendments or modification to the policy recommendations – Under section 16 of the GNSO PDP Manual the GNSO Council can make amendments or modifications to the recommendations it approved.

• Question about the assignment:
• What are the expectations of Council and Council leadership are for this small team?
• There is a double mission: the Board has written to the Council and sent questions; in principle, we should provide answers. At the same time, the Board has asked some leading questions – seem to be guiding us on a path into dividing the SSAD into piecemeal options. Think this group should step back and analyze the ODA to see if there are additional questions.
• Not hearing an assignment to go back to Council with next steps
• Small team will look at how to mitigate concerns either through looking at changing the proposed implementation or changing the policy recommendations. If there is an opinion, should the Council take back the recommendations, or does the Board agree with the changes? If so, it will go back to the Council for potential addressing.
• Do not anticipate this group becoming an EPDP and starting over but rather coming up with high-level ideas that could help
• The 3 first questions in the Google Doc are intended to inform the first 2 questions – the intent is to break these questions down into small pieces. If there is not a common or shared view on some of these questions, the small team may just provide the different views back on some of these questions

     3. Review of questions for input (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ip89qpS6D8bRWyA_rVFeT1ZCVEO3CQwr/edit [docs.google.com])

• Question 3 seems to suggest that there are important benefits from SSAD and should be added to the benefits included in the ODA
• Is this the right place, or if not, where can we have the discussion of code of conduct? If we could expedite the process of a code of conduct, that would be beneficial.
• The board letter didn’t just raise questions; it also outlined a number of concerns. The objective here is to see if those concerns are shared – the question here – there may not be a perceived benefit – are there benefits that need to be highlighted that would outweigh the potential concerns or costs?
• The usage noted in the ODA may be optimistic, should we dispute the usage of the system
• Q6 seems to be very difficult and may be likely to draw the group back into camps
• Do not want to rewrite the Board questions – one assignment is to consider how to respond to the board. This document doesn’t map to those questions – it seems to be having an identity crisis.
• The board did not ask questions, but just stated concerns
• The council is looking at the small team to see if the small team agrees with the board’s concerns

     4. Discuss proposed timeline:

• Complete team’s input on questions by 24 February
• Share any clarifying / follow up questions with ICANN org by 25 February
• Next meeting of small team to review input on questions – Wednesday 2 March
• Provide GNSO Council with initial update on small team findings by Friday 4 March
• GNSO Council – ICANN Board meeting at ICANN73 (Tuesday 8 March)
• GNSO Council meeting to consider small team findings & conversation with the ICANN Board. GNSO Council to indicate expectations in relation to potential further work by small team.

     5. AOB