December 2015 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Fwd: [council] Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Jan. 21, 2016

Jan. 21, 2016

FYI the report is attached. ALAC comments have, on the whole, been taken into account. Kindest regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Liaison to the GNSO -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [council] Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 23:15:30 +0000 From: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> To: council(a)gnso.icann.org <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Dear Councilors, Please find attached for your consideration the Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures, which is also available here: http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-final-issue…. You may recall that the Council requested an Issue Report on the topic at the Buenos Aires meeting in June 2015. Under the ICANN Bylaws, an Issue Report is a mandatory preceding step to a possible PDP that is initiated by the GNSO Council. The Preliminary Issue Report was published for public comment on 31 August 2015, with the forum closing on 30 October 2015. The Report of Public Comments received is expected to be published on 4 December 2015 and made available here: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31…. In preparing this Final Issue Report, all the public comments received were analyzed and, where relevant, incorporated into the Final Issue Report. The Report of Public Comments has also been added as a separate Annex. The staff recommendation is that the Council initiate a PDP to consider and analyze issues discussed in the Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures to determine whether changes or adjustments to the existing policy recommendations in the Final Report on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains are needed. The outcome of the PDP may lead to (i) amending or overriding existing policy principles, recommendations, and implementation guidelines; (ii) developing new policy recommendations, and/or (iii) supplementing or developing new implementation guidance. The relevant motions are currently in preparation for proposal by a GNSO Councilor. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know. Best, *Steven Chan* Sr. Policy Manager *ICANN *12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan(a)icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649

14 34

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Dec. 25, 2015

Dec. 25, 2015

Total of 36 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Dec 25 00:53:02 EST 2015 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 5.56% | 2 | 59.13% | 6875479 | jjs at dyalog.net 5.56% | 2 | 17.94% | 2085388 | vanda at scartezini.org 2.78% | 1 | 17.84% | 2074678 | wafa at ati.tn 13.89% | 5 | 1.14% | 132852 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 11.11% | 4 | 0.81% | 94159 | cdel at firsthand.net 8.33% | 3 | 0.50% | 58423 | kankaili at gmail.com 8.33% | 3 | 0.47% | 54822 | devtee at gmail.com 8.33% | 3 | 0.28% | 32905 | karl at cavebear.com 5.56% | 2 | 0.43% | 49708 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 5.56% | 2 | 0.37% | 43143 | staff at atlarge.icann.org 5.56% | 2 | 0.28% | 32710 | ocl at gih.com 5.56% | 2 | 0.13% | 15360 | johnl at iecc.com 2.78% | 1 | 0.29% | 34149 | apisan at unam.mx 2.78% | 1 | 0.11% | 12820 | tijani.benjemaa at benjemaa.com 2.78% | 1 | 0.10% | 11128 | vanda at uol.com.br 2.78% | 1 | 0.09% | 9919 | cw at christopherwilkinson.eu 2.78% | 1 | 0.08% | 9340 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 36 |100.00% | 11626983 | Total

1 0

I: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- Notice of Preliminary Determination To Grant Registrar Data Retention Waiver Request for Ascio Technologies, Inc. Danmark - filial af Ascio Technologies, Inc. USA
by Roberto Gaetano Dec. 24, 2015

Dec. 24, 2015

I am just wondering how much this overhead does cost. Instead of complying with European law, ICANN has chosen to disregard it, and now is obliged to grant waivers one by one to European registrars. Am I the only one who thinks that this is plain silly? Cheers, R. > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-announce- > bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] Per conto di ICANN At-Large Staff > Inviato: giovedì 10 dicembre 2015 04:03 > A: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Oggetto: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- Notice of Preliminary > Determination To Grant Registrar Data Retention Waiver Request for Ascio > Technologies, Inc. Danmark - filial af Ascio Technologies, Inc. USA > > > [ICANN]<http://www.icann.org/> > News Alert > > https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-12-09-en > > ________________________________ > Notice of Preliminary Determination To Grant Registrar Data Retention > Waiver Request for Ascio Technologies, Inc. Danmark - filial af Ascio > Technologies, Inc. USA > > 9 December 2015 > > ICANN has made a preliminary determination that it is prepared to grant a > data retention waiver request submitted by Registrar Ascio Technologies, > Inc. Danmark - filial af Ascio Technologies, Inc. USA ("Ascio") under the 2013 > Registrar Accreditation Agreement (the "2013 RAA"). Section 2 of the Data > Retention Specification (the "Specification") of the 2013 RAA provides that > prior to granting any exemption under the Specification, ICANN will post its > determination on the ICANN website for a period of thirty (30) calendar days. > > Pursuant to Section 2 of the Specification, Ascio has submitted to ICANN a > Registrar data retention waiver request ("Waiver Request") on the basis of > Ascio's contention that compliance with the data collection and/or retention > requirements of the Specification violates applicable law in Denmark. > > The Waiver Request was accompanied by a written legal opinion from a > nationally recognized law firm citing section 5 (5) of the Danish Act on > Processing of Personal Data of 31 May 2000 (the "DPPD"). That section > provides as follows (the following is an unofficial English translation from > Danish): > > Section 5 (5). > > The data collected may not be kept in a form which makes it possible to > identify the data subject for a longer period than is necessary for the > purposes for which the data are processed. > > Following receipt of the Waiver Request, and in accordance with the 2013 > RAA, ICANN through its legal counsel and Ascio discussed the matter in good > faith in an effort to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of the matter. > > The outcome of those discussions is that Ascio is seeking a waiver with > respect to Sections 1.1.1 through 1.1.8 of the Specification that seeks to > reduce from two years to one year the period for which these specified data > elements must be retained after the Registrar's sponsorship of the > Registration ends. > > ICANN has determined on a preliminary basis that it is prepared to grant the > Waiver Request. ICANN is posting this preliminary determination for a period > of thirty (30) calendar days to seek feedback and input from the community > on the proposed data retention waiver. After the thirty (30) calendar day > period following this posting has expired, ICANN will consider all feedback > and input received before making a final determination on whether to grant > the Waiver Request. > > The scope of the proposed waiver would be to permit Ascio to maintain the > information specified in Sections 1.1.1 through 1.1.8 of the Specification for > the duration of its sponsorship of the Registration and for a period of one (1) > additional year thereafter rather than two (2) additional years thereafter. In > all other respects the terms of the Specification would remain AS-IS. > > The specific change to the Specification would be that, for the duration of the > Waiver, the retention requirement of Section 1.1 of the Data Retention > Specification be changed from "two additional years" to "one additional > year." > > If ICANN does make a final determination to grant the Waiver Request > sought by Ascio, the provisions of Section 3 of the Specification would apply > to similar waivers requested by other registrars located in Denmark and > subject to Danish law. Section 3 of the Specification provides as follows: > > If (i) ICANN has previously waived compliance with the requirements of any > requirement of this Data Retention Specification in response to a Waiver > Request from a registrar that is located in the same jurisdiction as Registrar > and (ii) Registrar is subject to the same applicable law that gave rise to > ICANN's agreement to grant such waiver, Registrar may request that ICANN > to grant a similar waiver, which request shall be approved by ICANN, unless > ICANN provides Registrar with a reasonable justification for not approving > such request, in which case Registrar may thereafter make an Wavier > Request pursuant to Section 2 of this Data Retention Specification. > > The Registrar's Waiver Request and supporting documents are available > here: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/waiver-request-ascio- > technologies-09dec15-en.pdf [PDF, 6.39 MB] > > A public comment period will remain open until 23:59 UTC, 11 January 2016. > Public comments will be available for consideration by ICANN staff and the > ICANN Board. > > * Comments can be posted to: comments-ascio-technologies- > 09dec15(a)icann.org<mailto:comments-ascio-technologies- > 09dec15(a)icann.org> > * Comments can be viewed at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments- > ascio-technologies-09dec15/

18 38

Reminder of ICANN's Expected Standards of Behavior
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 23, 2015

Dec. 23, 2015

Dear All, Please note ICANN's expected standards of behavior (see: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2012-05-15-en) Of particular note are the following: * Treat all members of the ICANN community equally, irrespective of nationality, gender, racial or ethnic origin, religion or beliefs, disability, age, or sexual orientation; members of the ICANN community should treat each other with civility both face to face and online. * Act in a reasonable, objective and informed manner when participating in policy development and decision-making processes. This includes regularly attending all scheduled meetings and exercising independent judgment based solely on what is in the overall best interest of Internet users and the stability and security of the Internet's system of unique identifiers, irrespective of personal interests and the interests of the entity to which an individual might owe their appointment. * Listen to the views of all stakeholders when considering policy issues. ICANN is a unique multi-stakeholder environment. Those who take part in the ICANN process must acknowledge the importance of all stakeholders and seek to understand their points of view. * Act fairly and in good faith with other participants in the ICANN process. Kind regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine, Terri Agnew and Yesim Nazlar ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> [unknown.png]

1 0

Call for Volunteers: Advisory Panel on gTLD Marketplace Health Index
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 23, 2015

Dec. 23, 2015

Dear All, ICANN is calling for community volunteers to participate in the Advisory Panel on gTLD Marketplace Health Index. This Advisory Panel will review the proposed KPIs in the preliminary proposal of gTLD Marketplace Health Index<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gtld-marketplace-health-index-p…>, as well as the suggested potential updates in light of the public comment<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gtld-marketplace-health-2015-11-17-en> on this preliminary proposal. The Advisory Panel will also be asked to assist ICANN in finalizing the list of KPIs and in setting proposed benchmarks for measuring the health of the global gTLD marketplace. As an FYI, the ALAC has responded to the public comment on the gTLD Marketplace Health Index Proposal and submitted a Statement: https://newatlarge.icann.org/advice_statements/9745. At-Large members interested in this topic are welcome to join the Advisory Panel. Experience in the global domain name industry, economics, and data analytics will be particularly helpful to the Advisory Panel's work. Perspectives from diverse regions and backgrounds will help ensure that the gTLD Marketplace Health Index presents a holistic view of the global domain name marketplace. If you are interested in volunteering for the Advisory Panel, please email amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> by 22 January 2016. Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine, Terri Agnew and Yesim Nazlar ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> [unknown.png]

1 0

Fwd: Announcement of ICANN Public Comment Improvements Assessment Report
by Carlton Samuels Dec. 22, 2015

Dec. 22, 2015

FYI. I was not following this closely, largely because I still believe the real issue for the At-Large is the lack of bandwidth due to low participation; only a few people still doing the heavy lifting of reading the reports so one could sensibly mount a credible response. To my mind the time is imminent for the ALAC to decide and cherry pick issues meriting response. I recall the arguments linking the lack of timely translation of reports as contributory to the low participation rate from At-Large representatives, never mind the requirement for working knowledge of English. I also recall some position on eliminating the Reply Time Period in favour of a longer Comment Period. Was there a final ALAC position here? CAS ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= Dear Community Leaders: Earlier this year the ICANN Policy Development Support Team took on the implementation of specific ATRT2 recommendations looking to evolve and improve various aspects of the ICANN Public Comments infrastructure and operations. As part of those staff implementation obligations, my team committed to assessing the implementation effort and to producing a report of that analysis for the community by the end of this year. I am pleased to share that the assessment report has now been completed and is posted on the community wiki at this link - https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56987496. A pdf version of the report is available to download from that page. To help staff anticipate, envision and prepare for future improvements regarding how the organization manages, maintains and supports future community input streams, we are forming a staff Public Input Advisory Team pulling in representatives from different staff teams to share their perspectives. I am hopeful that we’ll be able to incorporate input and collaboration opportunities with community members to make that a practical, useful and valuable effort. If you or any member of community would be interested in contributing to such an effort, please drop me a line. We hope to get the group together at least once before the ICANN55 Marrakech meeting. Best Regards and Happy New Year, David David A. Olive Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul Hakki Yeten Cad. Selenium Plaza No:10/C K:10 34349 Fulya, Besiktas, Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.999.6212 Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611 Mobile: +90.533.341.6550 Email: david.olive(a)icann.org www.icann.org

2 1

season greeting to all colleagues around the world.
by Vanda Scartezini Dec. 21, 2015

Dec. 21, 2015

[cid:C5CE70AF-65C1-4CD6-909B-41BAB5B809F8] Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos.

3 2

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Dec. 18, 2015

Dec. 18, 2015

Total of 51 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Dec 18 00:53:03 EST 2015 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 1.96% | 1 | 67.59% | 7843321 | leonfelipe at sanchez.mx 1.96% | 1 | 19.59% | 2273228 | mcknight.glenn at gmail.com 13.73% | 7 | 2.07% | 239886 | roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com 9.80% | 5 | 0.86% | 99226 | ocl at gih.com 7.84% | 4 | 2.39% | 276966 | vanda at scartezini.org 9.80% | 5 | 0.35% | 40444 | johnl at iecc.com 7.84% | 4 | 0.91% | 106051 | kankaili at gmail.com 5.88% | 3 | 0.59% | 68239 | cdel at firsthand.net 5.88% | 3 | 0.48% | 55765 | h.raiche at internode.on.net 3.92% | 2 | 0.48% | 55759 | seun.ojedeji at gmail.com 3.92% | 2 | 0.44% | 51605 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 3.92% | 2 | 0.25% | 28687 | staff at atlarge.icann.org 3.92% | 2 | 0.13% | 15043 | karl at cavebear.com 1.96% | 1 | 1.07% | 123661 | maureen.hilyard at gmail.com 1.96% | 1 | 1.06% | 122976 | cw at christopherwilkinson.eu 1.96% | 1 | 0.75% | 86955 | adam.peake at icann.org 1.96% | 1 | 0.22% | 25730 | carlosaguirre62 at hotmail.com 1.96% | 1 | 0.20% | 23671 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 1.96% | 1 | 0.17% | 19347 | at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org 1.96% | 1 | 0.13% | 14520 | garth.graham at telus.net 1.96% | 1 | 0.11% | 12656 | seth.reiss at lex-ip.com 1.96% | 1 | 0.10% | 11659 | derek at aa419.org 1.96% | 1 | 0.08% | 8788 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 51 |100.00% | 11604183 | Total

1 0

Fwd: Paving the Way for a Next-Generation gTLD Registration Directory Service
by Carlton Samuels Dec. 17, 2015

Dec. 17, 2015

FYI. Note well, the call for PDP is set for booting on 4th January 2016. This is truly important work and following on the work of the EWG, it is a personal commitment to continue here, if only to valorise the great work (IMHO) coming out of the EWG. I trust we shall see a lot more At-Large participants - other than Holly and me - stepping up and signing up for what must be an extensive series of pdps....and multiple WGs. This usually attracts stellar staff support so I strongly encourage your connivance. CAS ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= h ttps://www.icann.org/news/blog/paving-the-way-for-a-next-generation-gtld-re… <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/paving-the-way-for-a-next-generation-gtld-r…> Paving the Way for a Next-Generation gTLD Registration Directory Service <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/paving-the-way-for-a-next-generation-gtld-r…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/paving-the-way-for-a-next-generation-gtld-r…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/paving-the-way-for-a-next-generation-gtld-r…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/paving-the-way-for-a-next-generation-gtld-r…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/paving-the-way-for-a-next-generation-gtld-r…> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/paving-the-way-for-a-next-generation-gtld-r…> I am pleased to provide you with an update about ICANN's progress on establishing a policy framework for a next-generation gTLD Registration Directory Service (RDS) to replace WHOIS. On 19 November, 2015, the GNSO Council approved a charter <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201511> for the Next-Generation gTLD Registration Directory Service (RDS) to replace WHOIS (Next-Gen RDS) Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group. This motion culminates a three-year effort to address concerns with WHOIS by creating a new policy framework capable of balancing diverse interests to meet today's needs for gTLD registration data. What's Next The GNSO Council is now proceeding with the Board-requested PDP, using the approved charter's <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/whois-ng-gtld-rds-charter-07oct15-en.pdf> [PDF, 628 KB] 3-phase process to (1) establish gTLD registration data requirements to determine if and why a next-generation RDS is needed, (2) design policies that detail functions that must be provided by a next-generation RDS to support those requirements, and (3) provide guidance for how a next-generation RDS should implement those policies, coexisting with and eventually replacing WHOIS. In its motion, the GNSO Council directed that the call for volunteers for the PDP WG be circulated as widely as possible in order to ensure broad representation and participation in the Working Group. This call will be initiated by 4 January 2016 and will remain open until the WG convenes for the first time. At this juncture, it is anticipated that the WG may convene late January to lay the groundwork for an initial face-to-face meeting at ICANN 55. All parties interested in a new policy framework for a next-generation RDS to replace WHOIS are invited to visit the RDS Wiki <https://community.icann.org/display/gTLDRDS/Next-Generation+gTLD+Registrati…> for background information, including the PDP WG's approved charter, inputs already provided by all SG/Cs during the public comment period, and an extensive library of foundational materials to inform the PDP WG's deliberations. In addition, the PDP WG will reach out to all SG/Cs for feedback on any items that they believe should be considered that may not have been specifically called out in the approved charter. As this will be a complex multi-phase PDP, all those interested in helping to shape the policy framework for a next-generation gTLD RDS are encouraged to volunteer for this PDP WG. Only with the help of the entire community can this PDP WG achieve its goal of formally defining an appropriate purpose of gTLD registration data and establishing a new policy framework to enable permissible access to that data with improved privacy and accuracy. Background and Recent Progress Created in the 1980s, WHOIS began as a service to identify and contact entities responsible for the operation of a network resource on the Internet. Over the years, ICANN's requirements for gTLD domain name registration data collection, access and accuracy have undergone some important changes. Yet, after nearly 15 years of task forces, review teams, and studies, comprehensive WHOIS policy reform remains the source of long-running discussion and debate. In 2012, the ICANN Board launched the Expert Working Group on gTLD Registration Directory Services (EWG) to help redefine the purpose of gTLD registration data and consider how to safeguard the data, and to propose a model for gTLD registration directory services (RDS) to address accuracy, privacy, and access issues. Upon publication of the EWG's Final Report in June, 2014, an informal group of GNSO Councilors and ICANN Board Members collaborated to propose a Process Framework for structuring a GNSO PDP to successfully address these challenging issues. This Process Framework was adopted by the Board in 2015, along with a reaffirmation of its 2012 request for a PDP to be convened to define the purpose of collecting, maintaining and providing access to gTLD registration data. The Board also asked that the PDP consider safeguards for protecting data, using the recommendations in the EWG's Final Report as an input to, and, if appropriate, as the foundation for a new gTLD policy. In preparation for this PDP, a new Preliminary Issue Report <http://whois.icann.org/sites/default/files/files/rds-prelim-issue-13jul15-e…> [PDF, 1.4 MB] was published for public comment <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rds-prelim-issue-2015-07-13-en> on 13 July 2015. A Final Issue Report <https://whois.icann.org/sites/default/files/files/final-issue-report-next-g…> [PDF, 1.2 MB] was subsequently published on 7 October 2015, including links to all public comments received, along with a draft charter for the PDP WG. This draft charter was approved by the GNSO Council on 19 November 2015 <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+19+November…>, enabling the formation of a GNSO working group of community volunteers to progress this PDP. Author: Marika Konings, Senior Policy Director, Policy Development Support and Team Leader for the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) David A. Olive Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul Hakki Yeten Cad. Selenium Plaza No:10/C K:10 34349 Fulya, Besiktas, Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.999.6212 Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611 Mobile: +90.533.341.6550 Email: david.olive(a)icann.org www.icann.org

2 1

New Public Comment: Release of Country and Territory Names within the .STUDY, .COURSES, .LAMBORGHINI, XN--3OQ18VL8PN36A, .VOLKSWAGEN, .BUGATTI, .AUDI and .DELTA TLDs
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 17, 2015

Dec. 17, 2015

Dear All, This is to let you know that the Public Comment on the Release of Country and Territory Names within the .STUDY, .COURSES, .LAMBORGHINI, XN--3OQ18VL8PN36A, .VOLKSWAGEN, .BUGATTI, .AUDI and .DELTA TLDs has now gone live: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ctn-release-tlds-2015-12-15-en. The dates of the Public Comment will be 15 December 2015 - 27 January 2016 23:59 UTC. During this period, anyone can submit comment via comments-ctn-release-tlds-15dec15(a)icann.org. As an advisory committee of ICANN, the ALAC submits Statements on Public Comment and advises on policy matters related to the interest of Internet users worldwide. Not just limited to the 15 ALAC members, members from the wider At-Large community are welcome to draft a Statement on behalf of the ALAC. If you are interested in drafting an ALAC Statement on this Public Comment, kindly contact staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>. At-Large Staff will follow up and help you understand the procedure. Additionally, the wiki workspace for developing a potential ALAC Statement is here: https://community.icann.org/x/6o5lAw. All pertinent resources for this public comment can also be found there. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 0