Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [ccTLDcommunity] [ccnso-members] Board comments on CCWG Proposal
All, There is obviously some issue going on with mail servers somewhere as the below emails have just arrived from many months ago. I have no idea what is causing the problem but my technical folks are checking at our end. Apologies for the inconvenience. Cheers, Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer .au Domain Administration Ltd T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112 E: ceo@auda.org.au | W: www.auda.org.au auDA - Australia's Domain Name Administrator
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> Date: March 17, 2016 at 06:53:48 GMT To: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Cc: ccTLD Community List <cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org>, ccNSO Members <ccnso-members@icann.org>, <cctldworld@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccTLDcommunity] [ccnso-members] Board comments on CCWG Proposal Chris,
Thank you, I shall read after transit.
But, why am I not surprised?
el
-- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5c
On 14 Dec 2015, at 11:57, Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello All,
You will probably by now have seen that the Board has submitted some comments in respect to the Third CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal and an accompanying letter from Steve Crocker. In case you haven’t seen these yet, they are attached.
I thought it was important, as a ccNSO elected member of the Board, to write to you to explain the background to these comments and offer to discuss them with you at your convenience.
I am writing personally and not at the behest of the Board nor to provide you with input/comment from the Board. These are my personal opinions about where I think the Board is at, their motivation (and mine) for making the comments and what some of the comments might mean.
In my opinion, the Board is 100% supportive of the transition and filled with admiration for the work and effort of those involved in the CCWG. The Board believes that there are a number of areas of concern in the report that need to be dealt with. I stress that these are concerns of the Board as a whole. They are not concerns of staff that have simply been agreed to by the Board but rather concerns that the Board has expressed. Whilst the comment document has been drafted by staff (as has the draft proposal from the CCWG) this has been done at the direction of the Board and the full Board has unanimously endorsed the comments.
Some of these areas of concern can be characterised as ‘might it be better if’ areas but a small number are of higher concern. The Board has carefully considered these and provided detailed comment together with suggestions for dealing with the problem(s) that the Board perceives. There may be other solutions to the problems and the Board is not tied to its suggested solution.
In my opinion, the Board believes that if these higher concern recommendations (or parts thereof) are not dealt with then when the Board applies the global public interest test, in accordance with its resolution of 16 October 2014 (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-16-en#2.d), there is a significant chance that the Board will find that some of those recommendations do not meet that test.
I fully endorse the Board comments and I believe that it is in all of our best interests as ccTLD managers to take them into account. I encourage you to carefully consider the CCWG recommendations and the comments of the Board and to provide your input to the ccNSO Council. I fully respect that some of you will not agree with all (or any!) of the comments of the Board but hope that, given my role and my commitment to the ccNSO and ccTLDs generally, you will understand that these comments are well intentioned and made in an effort to solve real issues with the current CCWG draft.
I stress again that the Board is, in my opinion, 100% behind the transition. However, the transition has to be 'done right' and ‘transition at all costs’ is not an acceptable stance, in my view. I know the time line is important but I would rather miss a deadline than not deal with the very real concerns of a group of 19 experienced individuals who have been nominated or elected to the Board to serve the ICANN community and to act in their best interests.
I will be delighted to answer any questions (on or off list) and to talk to you one-on-one or as a group. I stand ready to do whatever it takes to get a CCWG Final Report out to NTIA as soon as possible.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer
.au Domain Administration Ltd
T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112
E: ceo@auda.org.au | W: www.auda.org.au
auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator
<14-DEC-15-Board Comments to CCWG[1][3].pdf> <20151214 Comments on CCWG Report_SCrocker[7].pdf>
ccTLDcommunity mailing list ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lists.cctld-2Dmanage...
To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org
I have the same spamming problem for the last two days: previous ICANN related mail is coming again in my inbox. Hope somebody can stop this. Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez +506 8837 7176 Skype: carlos.raulg Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica) On 17 Mar 2016, at 9:31, Chris Disspain wrote:
All,
There is obviously some issue going on with mail servers somewhere as the below emails have just arrived from many months ago. I have no idea what is causing the problem but my technical folks are checking at our end. Apologies for the inconvenience.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer .au Domain Administration Ltd T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112 E: ceo@auda.org.au | W: www.auda.org.au
auDA - Australia's Domain Name Administrator
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> Date: March 17, 2016 at 06:53:48 GMT To: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Cc: ccTLD Community List <cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org>, ccNSO Members <ccnso-members@icann.org>, <cctldworld@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccTLDcommunity] [ccnso-members] Board comments on CCWG Proposal Chris,
Thank you, I shall read after transit.
But, why am I not surprised?
el
-- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5c
On 14 Dec 2015, at 11:57, Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello All,
You will probably by now have seen that the Board has submitted some comments in respect to the Third CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal and an accompanying letter from Steve Crocker. In case you haven’t seen these yet, they are attached.
I thought it was important, as a ccNSO elected member of the Board, to write to you to explain the background to these comments and offer to discuss them with you at your convenience.
I am writing personally and not at the behest of the Board nor to provide you with input/comment from the Board. These are my personal opinions about where I think the Board is at, their motivation (and mine) for making the comments and what some of the comments might mean.
In my opinion, the Board is 100% supportive of the transition and filled with admiration for the work and effort of those involved in the CCWG. The Board believes that there are a number of areas of concern in the report that need to be dealt with. I stress that these are concerns of the Board as a whole. They are not concerns of staff that have simply been agreed to by the Board but rather concerns that the Board has expressed. Whilst the comment document has been drafted by staff (as has the draft proposal from the CCWG) this has been done at the direction of the Board and the full Board has unanimously endorsed the comments.
Some of these areas of concern can be characterised as ‘might it be better if’ areas but a small number are of higher concern. The Board has carefully considered these and provided detailed comment together with suggestions for dealing with the problem(s) that the Board perceives. There may be other solutions to the problems and the Board is not tied to its suggested solution.
In my opinion, the Board believes that if these higher concern recommendations (or parts thereof) are not dealt with then when the Board applies the global public interest test, in accordance with its resolution of 16 October 2014 (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-16-en#2.d), there is a significant chance that the Board will find that some of those recommendations do not meet that test.
I fully endorse the Board comments and I believe that it is in all of our best interests as ccTLD managers to take them into account. I encourage you to carefully consider the CCWG recommendations and the comments of the Board and to provide your input to the ccNSO Council. I fully respect that some of you will not agree with all (or any!) of the comments of the Board but hope that, given my role and my commitment to the ccNSO and ccTLDs generally, you will understand that these comments are well intentioned and made in an effort to solve real issues with the current CCWG draft.
I stress again that the Board is, in my opinion, 100% behind the transition. However, the transition has to be 'done right' and ‘transition at all costs’ is not an acceptable stance, in my view. I know the time line is important but I would rather miss a deadline than not deal with the very real concerns of a group of 19 experienced individuals who have been nominated or elected to the Board to serve the ICANN community and to act in their best interests.
I will be delighted to answer any questions (on or off list) and to talk to you one-on-one or as a group. I stand ready to do whatever it takes to get a CCWG Final Report out to NTIA as soon as possible.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer
.au Domain Administration Ltd
T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112
E: ceo@auda.org.au | W: www.auda.org.au
auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator
<14-DEC-15-Board Comments to CCWG[1][3].pdf> <20151214 Comments on CCWG Report_SCrocker[7].pdf>
ccTLDcommunity mailing list ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lists.cctld-2Dmanage...
To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
now I AM surprised :-)-O but I can only only review the mail headers tonight. el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5c
On 17 Mar 2016, at 09:31, Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au> wrote:
All,
There is obviously some issue going on with mail servers somewhere as the below emails have just arrived from many months ago. I have no idea what is causing the problem but my technical folks are checking at our end. Apologies for the inconvenience.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer .au Domain Administration Ltd T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112 E: ceo@auda.org.au | W: www.auda.org.au
auDA - Australia's Domain Name Administrator
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> Date: March 17, 2016 at 06:53:48 GMT To: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Cc: ccTLD Community List <cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org>, ccNSO Members <ccnso-members@icann.org>, <cctldworld@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccTLDcommunity] [ccnso-members] Board comments on CCWG Proposal Chris,
Thank you, I shall read after transit.
But, why am I not surprised?
el
-- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5c
On 14 Dec 2015, at 11:57, Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au> wrote:
Hello All,
You will probably by now have seen that the Board has submitted some comments in respect to the Third CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal and an accompanying letter from Steve Crocker. In case you haven’t seen these yet, they are attached.
I thought it was important, as a ccNSO elected member of the Board, to write to you to explain the background to these comments and offer to discuss them with you at your convenience.
I am writing personally and not at the behest of the Board nor to provide you with input/comment from the Board. These are my personal opinions about where I think the Board is at, their motivation (and mine) for making the comments and what some of the comments might mean.
In my opinion, the Board is 100% supportive of the transition and filled with admiration for the work and effort of those involved in the CCWG. The Board believes that there are a number of areas of concern in the report that need to be dealt with. I stress that these are concerns of the Board as a whole. They are not concerns of staff that have simply been agreed to by the Board but rather concerns that the Board has expressed. Whilst the comment document has been drafted by staff (as has the draft proposal from the CCWG) this has been done at the direction of the Board and the full Board has unanimously endorsed the comments.
Some of these areas of concern can be characterised as ‘might it be better if’ areas but a small number are of higher concern. The Board has carefully considered these and provided detailed comment together with suggestions for dealing with the problem(s) that the Board perceives. There may be other solutions to the problems and the Board is not tied to its suggested solution.
In my opinion, the Board believes that if these higher concern recommendations (or parts thereof) are not dealt with then when the Board applies the global public interest test, in accordance with its resolution of 16 October 2014 (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-16-en#2.d), there is a significant chance that the Board will find that some of those recommendations do not meet that test.
I fully endorse the Board comments and I believe that it is in all of our best interests as ccTLD managers to take them into account. I encourage you to carefully consider the CCWG recommendations and the comments of the Board and to provide your input to the ccNSO Council. I fully respect that some of you will not agree with all (or any!) of the comments of the Board but hope that, given my role and my commitment to the ccNSO and ccTLDs generally, you will understand that these comments are well intentioned and made in an effort to solve real issues with the current CCWG draft.
I stress again that the Board is, in my opinion, 100% behind the transition. However, the transition has to be 'done right' and ‘transition at all costs’ is not an acceptable stance, in my view. I know the time line is important but I would rather miss a deadline than not deal with the very real concerns of a group of 19 experienced individuals who have been nominated or elected to the Board to serve the ICANN community and to act in their best interests.
I will be delighted to answer any questions (on or off list) and to talk to you one-on-one or as a group. I stand ready to do whatever it takes to get a CCWG Final Report out to NTIA as soon as possible.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer
.au Domain Administration Ltd
T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112
E: ceo@auda.org.au | W: www.auda.org.au
auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator
<14-DEC-15-Board Comments to CCWG[1][3].pdf> <20151214 Comments on CCWG Report_SCrocker[7].pdf>
ccTLDcommunity mailing list ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lists.cctld-2Dmanage...
To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org
_______________________________________________ ccTLDcommunity mailing list ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org http://www.lists.cctld-managers.org/mailman/listinfo/cctldcommunity
To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org
Hi, Yes, the way late email is coming through has been startling several times. Most of it seems to be email we have seen before. avri On 17-Mar-16 04:31, Chris Disspain wrote:
All,
There is obviously some issue going on with mail servers somewhere as the below emails have just arrived from many months ago. I have no idea what is causing the problem but my technical folks are checking at our end. Apologies for the inconvenience.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer .au Domain Administration Ltd T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112 E: ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> | W: www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au>
auDA - Australia's Domain Name Administrator
Begin forwarded message:
*From:* Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na <mailto:el@lisse.na>> *Date:* March 17, 2016 at 06:53:48 GMT *To:* CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> *Cc:* ccTLD Community List <cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org <mailto:cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org>>, ccNSO Members <ccnso-members@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-members@icann.org>>, <cctldworld@icann.org <mailto:cctldworld@icann.org>> *Subject:* *Re: [ccTLDcommunity] [ccnso-members] Board comments on CCWG Proposal*
Chris,
Thank you, I shall read after transit.
But, why am I not surprised?
el
-- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5c
On 14 Dec 2015, at 11:57, Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au>> wrote:
Hello All,
You will probably by now have seen that the Board has submitted some comments in respect to the Third CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal and an accompanying letter from Steve Crocker. In case you haven’t seen these yet, they are attached.
I thought it was important, as a ccNSO elected member of the Board, to write to you to explain the background to these comments and offer to discuss them with you at your convenience.
I am writing personally and not at the behest of the Board nor to provide you with input/comment from the Board. These are my personal opinions about where I think the Board is at, their motivation (and mine) for making the comments and what some of the comments might mean.
In my opinion, the Board is 100% supportive of the transition and filled with admiration for the work and effort of those involved in the CCWG. The Board believes that there are a number of areas of concern in the report that need to be dealt with. I stress that these are concerns of the Board as a whole. They are not concerns of staff that have simply been agreed to by the Board but rather concerns that the Board has expressed. Whilst the comment document has been drafted by staff (as has the draft proposal from the CCWG) this has been done at the direction of the Board and the full Board has unanimously endorsed the comments.
Some of these areas of concern can be characterised as ‘might it be better if’ areas but a small number are of higher concern. The Board has carefully considered these and provided detailed comment together with suggestions for dealing with the problem(s) that the Board perceives. There may be other solutions to the problems and the Board is not tied to its suggested solution.
In my opinion, the Board believes that if these higher concern recommendations (or parts thereof) are not dealt with then when the Board applies the global public interest test, in accordance with its resolution of 16 October 2014 (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-16-en#2.d <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources...>), there is a significant chance that the Board will find that some of those recommendations do not meet that test.
I fully endorse the Board comments and I believe that it is in all of our best interests as ccTLD managers to take them into account. I encourage you to carefully consider the CCWG recommendations and the comments of the Board and to provide your input to the ccNSO Council. I fully respect that some of you will not agree with all (or any!) of the comments of the Board but hope that, given my role and my commitment to the ccNSO and ccTLDs generally, you will understand that these comments are well intentioned and made in an effort to solve real issues with the current CCWG draft.
I stress again that the Board is, in my opinion, 100% behind the transition. However, the transition has to be 'done right' and ‘transition at all costs’ is not an acceptable stance, in my view. I know the time line is important but I would rather miss a deadline than not deal with the very real concerns of a group of 19 experienced individuals who have been nominated or elected to the Board to serve the ICANN community and to act in their best interests.
I will be delighted to answer any questions (on or off list) and to talk to you one-on-one or as a group. I stand ready to do whatever it takes to get a CCWG Final Report out to NTIA as soon as possible.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain| Chief Executive Officer
.au Domain Administration Ltd
T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112
E: ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> | W:www.auda.org.au <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.auda.org.au_&d=CwMFa...>
auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator
<14-DEC-15-Board Comments to CCWG[1][3].pdf> <20151214 Comments on CCWG Report_SCrocker[7].pdf>
ccTLDcommunity mailing list ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org <mailto:ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lists.cctld-2Dmanage...
To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org <mailto:ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org>
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Good to know that there is institutional memory... el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5c
On 17 Mar 2016, at 13:28, avri doria <avri@apc.org> wrote:
Hi,
Yes, the way late email is coming through has been startling several times. Most of it seems to be email we have seen before.
avri
On 17-Mar-16 04:31, Chris Disspain wrote: All,
There is obviously some issue going on with mail servers somewhere as the below emails have just arrived from many months ago. I have no idea what is causing the problem but my technical folks are checking at our end. Apologies for the inconvenience.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer .au Domain Administration Ltd T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112 E: ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> | W: www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au>
auDA - Australia's Domain Name Administrator
Begin forwarded message:
*From:* Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na <mailto:el@lisse.na>> *Date:* March 17, 2016 at 06:53:48 GMT *To:* CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> *Cc:* ccTLD Community List <cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org <mailto:cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org>>, ccNSO Members <ccnso-members@icann.org <mailto:ccnso-members@icann.org>>, <cctldworld@icann.org <mailto:cctldworld@icann.org>> *Subject:* *Re: [ccTLDcommunity] [ccnso-members] Board comments on CCWG Proposal*
Chris,
Thank you, I shall read after transit.
But, why am I not surprised?
el
-- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5c
On 14 Dec 2015, at 11:57, Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au>> wrote:
Hello All,
You will probably by now have seen that the Board has submitted some comments in respect to the Third CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal and an accompanying letter from Steve Crocker. In case you haven’t seen these yet, they are attached.
I thought it was important, as a ccNSO elected member of the Board, to write to you to explain the background to these comments and offer to discuss them with you at your convenience.
I am writing personally and not at the behest of the Board nor to provide you with input/comment from the Board. These are my personal opinions about where I think the Board is at, their motivation (and mine) for making the comments and what some of the comments might mean.
In my opinion, the Board is 100% supportive of the transition and filled with admiration for the work and effort of those involved in the CCWG. The Board believes that there are a number of areas of concern in the report that need to be dealt with. I stress that these are concerns of the Board as a whole. They are not concerns of staff that have simply been agreed to by the Board but rather concerns that the Board has expressed. Whilst the comment document has been drafted by staff (as has the draft proposal from the CCWG) this has been done at the direction of the Board and the full Board has unanimously endorsed the comments.
Some of these areas of concern can be characterised as ‘might it be better if’ areas but a small number are of higher concern. The Board has carefully considered these and provided detailed comment together with suggestions for dealing with the problem(s) that the Board perceives. There may be other solutions to the problems and the Board is not tied to its suggested solution.
In my opinion, the Board believes that if these higher concern recommendations (or parts thereof) are not dealt with then when the Board applies the global public interest test, in accordance with its resolution of 16 October 2014 (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-16-en#2.d <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources...>), there is a significant chance that the Board will find that some of those recommendations do not meet that test.
I fully endorse the Board comments and I believe that it is in all of our best interests as ccTLD managers to take them into account. I encourage you to carefully consider the CCWG recommendations and the comments of the Board and to provide your input to the ccNSO Council. I fully respect that some of you will not agree with all (or any!) of the comments of the Board but hope that, given my role and my commitment to the ccNSO and ccTLDs generally, you will understand that these comments are well intentioned and made in an effort to solve real issues with the current CCWG draft.
I stress again that the Board is, in my opinion, 100% behind the transition. However, the transition has to be 'done right' and ‘transition at all costs’ is not an acceptable stance, in my view. I know the time line is important but I would rather miss a deadline than not deal with the very real concerns of a group of 19 experienced individuals who have been nominated or elected to the Board to serve the ICANN community and to act in their best interests.
I will be delighted to answer any questions (on or off list) and to talk to you one-on-one or as a group. I stand ready to do whatever it takes to get a CCWG Final Report out to NTIA as soon as possible.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain| Chief Executive Officer
.au Domain Administration Ltd
T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112
E: ceo@auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> | W:www.auda.org.au <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.auda.org.au_&d=CwMFa...>
auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator
<14-DEC-15-Board Comments to CCWG[1][3].pdf> <20151214 Comments on CCWG Report_SCrocker[7].pdf>
ccTLDcommunity mailing list ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org <mailto:ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lists.cctld-2Dmanage...
To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org <mailto:ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org>
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
participants (5)
-
avri doria -
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. -
Chris Disspain -
Dr Eberhard W Lisse -
tijani.benjemaa＠planet.tn