August 2018 - Ccnso-council

Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
by Joke Braeken Aug. 15, 2018

Aug. 15, 2018

Dear All, On July 2, 2018; the Global Stakeholder Engagement (GSE) Africa team convened a select committee of Supporting Organization (SO) / Advisory Committee (AC) representatives from Africa to review the current Africa strategy. They came up with a draft reviewed document ICANN Africa Strategy Ver 3.0 2016 – 2020. This public comment proceeding is seeking further input from the community on the draft document in line with our commitment to inclusive bottom-up and multistakeholder approach. Current Status: The Africa strategy was one of the first ever regional plans approved by ICANNorg. The strategy document itself is a living document and should be flexible enough to respond to the changing needs and prevailing circumstance of the community. Hence the need for this regular review and appraisal to ensure that ICANN Org, and indeed the Africa Strategy is responsive to the community in conformance to the overall Mission and remit of ICANNorganization (org.) The first review was done by the community in November 2014 and resulted in the current ICANN Africa Strategy Ver 2.0 2016 – 2020<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/africa-strategy-implementation-…>. ICANN has since undergone important transformations in the last 3 years such as the IANA stewardship transition (October 2016) that led to introduction of new ICANN Bylaws and created an Empowered Community of ICANN. It was therefore important to revisit the Africa Strategy to realign it to these new realities at ICANN org. Next Steps: ICANN org. will consolidate the comments, generate an updated strategy document as per the comments and formally re-launch the reviewed ICANN – Africa Strategic Plan FY16 – FY20 at the upcoming ICANN63 meeting. Read more: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en Close Date: 10 Sep 2018 23:59 UTC Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org

1 0

Proposals for Devanagari, Gurmukhi, and Gujarati Scripts' Root Zone Label Generation Rules
by Joke Braeken Aug. 15, 2018

Aug. 15, 2018

Dear all, The Neo-Brahmi Script Generation Panel (NBGP) was formed by nine communities that use scripts derived from the Brahmi script. NBGP is developing Root Zone Label Generation Rules (LGR) for Bengali, Devanagari, Gujarati, Gurmukhi, Kannada, Malayalam, Oriya, Tamil and Telugu scripts. The GP intends to publish the proposals for the LGRs of these nine scripts in three sets, releasing proposals for the scripts which share cross-script variant code points together to the extent possible. The first set includes the following: (1) Proposal for the Devanagari Script Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone, (2) Proposal for the Gurmukhi Script Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone, and (3) Proposal for the Gujarati Script Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone. As per the LGR Procedure [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste…>, these proposals are being posted for public comments to allow those who have not participated in the NBGP to make their views known. Based on the feedback, the NBGP will finalize each proposal for its evaluation and integration into the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone. Read more: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2018-07-27-en [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_ann…> Deadline for comments: 10 September 2018 Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org

1 0

Recommendations for Managing IDN Variant Top-Level Domains
by Joke Braeken Aug. 15, 2018

Aug. 15, 2018

Dear All, Recommendations for managing Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) variant labels for top level domains (TLDs) have been developed by ICANN organization. The relevant materials along with the recommendations are being published to seek community feedback for finalizing them. Close Date: 3 Sep 2018 23:59 UTC Current Status: The community has identified a need for IDN variant TLDs; however, the ICANN Board resolved on 25 September 2010 that "no variants of gTLDs will be delegated ... until appropriate variant management solutions are developed." Subsequent work by ICANN organization and the community led to the identification of two issues: (i) there is no accepted definition for variant TLDs, and (ii) there is no 'variant management' mechanism for TLDs. For the first issue, the Root Zone Label Generation Rules (RZ-LGR) Procedure was developed with the support of the community and adopted by the ICANN Board on 11 April 2013 for implementation. The Procedure has been implemented and RZ-LGR has been developed for six scripts, and other scripts are being added as their proposals are finalized by the relevant script communities. For the second issue, ICANN organization has undertaken a detailed examination to develop a set of recommendations on variant management mechanisms for TLDs, which will be finalized based on the community input. Next Steps: The finalized recommendations will be presented to the ICANN Board, anticipated in March 2019. At that time, the ICANN Board will be requested to consider these recommendations to allow for implementing IDN variant TLDs. Read more: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/managing-idn-variant-tlds-2018-07-25-… Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org

1 0

Fwd: [Gnso-sc-budget] Please discuss these questions with your SG/C [was: Agenda - 30 July 2018 - SCBO Meeting - 13:00 UTC]
by philippe.fouquart＠orange.com Aug. 14, 2018

Aug. 14, 2018

Dear ccNSO council, The Standing Committee on Budget and Operations established by the GNSO council is looking into its own future after a bit less than a year of existence and one of the questions is whether there would be benefit in having the ccNSO being involved or liaised with somehow. Your views would be welcome. Regards, Philippe -------- Message d'origine -------- De : Ayden Férdeline <icann(a)ferdeline.com> Date : 30/07/2018 23:24 (GMT+01:00) À : mail(a)berrycobb.com Cc : gnso-sc-budget(a)icann.org Objet : [Gnso-sc-budget] Please discuss these questions with your SG/C [was: Agenda - 30 July 2018 - SCBO Meeting - 13:00 UTC] Hi, all- Firstly, thanks to Berry for this summary and for preparing a first draft of this report. On our call today we thought it prudent to take the questions in Section 1.4 back to our respective Stakeholder Groups/Constituencies for feedback. (I have copied and pasted the questions below, for easy reference.) Could you please consult with your part of the community, and bring any comments back to our mailing list by Monday, 13 August? We can then look over all of the comments and based upon your feedback I will draft up some common recommendations for your review with a view to submitting these, once finalised, to the GNSO Council. Our next call will be on Monday, 20 August and I hope we can spend this call wordsmithing those recommendations. Once the language is a bit more final, we should still have another two weeks left to accept edits or comments on our mailing list, ahead of the document submission deadline for the Council’s September meeting. Please let me know if you have any concerns regarding this path forward. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline ______________________________ Questions to Consider In reviewing the SCBO’s activity, lessons learned, and potential changes to its charter, the following questions should be considered: * Should the SCBO continue to exist? * Does the charter need to be amended? If so, how? * Was there adequate representation from the Council? * Was participation from SG/C subject matter experts who were not Council members helpful? * Should the Council submit comments without objection or create a motion for adoption? * Should proposed comments be more precise? * Should collaboration with the CCNSO be established? * Was collaboration with ICANN’s Finance team useful and are changes required should the SCBO continue? * How do we better understand when the GNSO Council should be making comments vs. comments submitted from SGs/Cs and avoid overlap or competing positions? On 30 Jul 2018, at 15:46, mail(a)berrycobb.com<mailto:mail@berrycobb.com> wrote: Hi All, Please find attached the next version of the SCBO After Action Report. The action from SCBO members and SMEs is take the questions back to their respective groups to solicit input and suggestions for converting the questions into statements and/or observations. In parallel, Phillipe will collaborate with the CCNSO about a liaison relationship between the two groups. Thank you. B Berry A. Cobb GNSO Policy Consultant @berrycobb From: Gnso-sc-budget [mailto:gnso-sc-budget-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of mail(a)berrycobb.com<mailto:mail@berrycobb.com> Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2018 11:20 To: gnso-sc-budget(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-sc-budget] Agenda - 30 July 2018 - SCBO Meeting - 13:00 UTC Hi All, Please find below our agenda for the 30 July 2018 SCBO call at 13:00 UTC. The call is scheduled for 60 minutes. 1) Administrative Matters a. SOIs 2) Review draft SCBO After Action Report 3) AOB / Next meeting I attached a draft of the After Action Report for your review prior to the meeting. Track changes are enabled should you have any suggested changes. In chatting with Council leadership, consideration of the SCBO report will occur in September. Therefore, we need to have this report completed by 17 September 2018 for the Motions and Documents deadline. Thank you. B Berry A. Cobb 720.839.5735 mail(a)berrycobb.com<mailto:mail@berrycobb.com> @berrycobb <gnso-SCBO-after-action-report-v0.2.docx> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.

1 0

REMINDER: Call for Expression of Interest: IANA Naming Function Review Team (IFRT).
by Kimberly Carlson Aug. 14, 2018

Aug. 14, 2018

Dear all, Just a reminder, see below. Thank you, Kim From: Kimberly Carlson Sent: Friday, August 10, 2018 8:07 AM To: 'ccNSO Members' <ccnso-members(a)icann.org>; ccTLDcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org Cc: ccnso-council(a)icann.org Subject: Call for Expression of Interest: IANA Naming Function Review Team (IFRT). Dear All, The ccNSO Secretariat is launching a call for Expression of Interest (EoI) for 3 members of the IANA Naming Function Review Team (IFRT). The call for EoI will be open today Friday, 10 August 2018 and will close on Friday, 24 August 2018 (17:00 UTC). If interested, please send the following documents to: ccnsosecretariat(a)icann.org<mailto:ccnsosecretariat@icann.org> no later than Friday 24 August 2018 (17:00 UTC). 1. Completed application form (see attachment), both the Word doc and fillable pdf is included for your convenience. 2. Your resume, curriculum vitae, or biography. 3. If applicable, a letter of support from your employer in respect to the required time commitment to participate actively in the IFRT. Composition of the review team The three ccNSO appointed members to the IFRT are to be appointed in accordance with the rules and procedures of the ccNSO and must be from different ICANN regions. The composition of the review team, which is specified by the Bylaws, includes, among others: (a) Two representatives appointed by the ccNSO from its ccTLD registry operator representatives; (b) One non-ccNSO ccTLD representative who is associated with a ccTLD registry operator that is not a representative of the ccNSO, appointed by the ccNSO; it is strongly recommended that the ccNSO consult with the regional ccTLD organizations (i.e., AfTLD, APTLD, LACTLD, and CENTR) in making its appointment; Further details on the candidate qualification requirements are included at the bottom of this email. Next Steps Once we have received your intent to volunteers as IFRT member, the ccNSO Secretariat will send you a link to an online Acknowledgement of Terms Form. Via this form, you consent to ICANN processing data in order to add you as a member of the IFRT and its mailing list(s). The form explains the information ICANN will process to administer your participation in the IFRT and how the information will be used this purpose. It also describes the rights you have regarding your information. (Terms of Service<https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>) Background As this is the first time the ccNSO needs to select members to the IFRT, to ensure that all requirements set in the Bylaws are met, the ccNSO Council agreed to follow the procedure as described in a temporary guideline (attached). The purpose of this temporary guideline is to document processes and procedures pertaining to the ccNSO Council's responsibilities with respect to the appointment of members to the IFRT and to serve as a basis for a guideline for future appointments. Links/Attachments * Temporary ccNSO Guideline ccNSO Actions with Respect to the Selection of ccNSO Appointed Members to the IFRT * IFRT membership application Form (Word and PDF) Thank you. Best regards, Kim Carlson IFRT Candidate Qualification Requirements Skill set and experience * Direct experience and knowledge of the IANA naming functions. * Understanding the purpose of the IFR. * Analytical skills, ability to interpret quantitative and qualitative evidence, and the capacity to draw conclusions purely based on evidence. * Experience in managing and/or participating in committees (e.g. meeting coordination, reporting, and escalation) to contribute meaningfully to IFR processes. * Demonstrated ability in relationship management to support discussion, consensus-driven decision making, and productive negotiation. * Excellent communication skills to represent ccTLD interests and to keep the ccNSO Council and broader ccTLD community informed on progress. * Ability to work and communicate in written and spoken English. Further a candidate: * Should indicate why she or he is interested in becoming involved in the IFR. * Indicate the ccTLD manager with whom the candidate is associated. * Should be employed or have active backing by the ccTLD manager with whom the candidate is associated. * Demonstrate the support by the ccTLD manager in respect to the required time commitment to participate actively in the IFR. * Indicate whether willing to stand as co-chair * Commit to abide by the rules of the IFRT and the temporary Guideline. In addition, and in accordance with the requirements with respect to the composition of an IFRT, only if a candidate is considered to meet the above criteria, functional and cultural diversity criteria should be taken into account. _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Kimberly Carlson ccNSO Support Lead Administrator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Skype kimberly.carlson.icann www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> Top of Form Bottom of Form

1 0

Call for presentations: ccTLD News | ICANN63
by Joke Braeken Aug. 14, 2018

Aug. 14, 2018

Dear All, The call for presentations for the upcoming ccNSO Member Meeting (ccTLD news session) is now open. The ccNSO Meeting Programme Working Group invites you to share your best practices, project solutions, implementations and case studies by presenting at the ccTLD news session, covering for instance recent developments, ccTLD activities and ccTLD management related topics. The ccTLD news session is tentatively scheduled for day 2 of the ccNSO Members Meeting, on Wednesday, 24 October 2018 in Barcelona (ICANN63). If your registry is interested in presenting at the ccTLD News Session, please contact Joke Braeken (joke.braeken(a)icann.org)<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org)>, no later than Wednesday, 5 September 2018. Candidate presenters are invited to send the following information to Joke Braeken (joke.braeken(a)icann.org)<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org)>, at their earliest convenience - no later than 5 September 2018. = = = = = * Exact title of your presentation * First name of the presenter * Last name of the presenter * Company/ccTLD of the presenter * Short summary of your presentation (few sentences) Please note: Has your presentation been shown at another industry event? If so, kindly specify where. In order to avoid unnecessary overlap with other meetings, you are kindly encouraged to adopt the presentation to a global audience. = = = = = Each submission is reviewed and evaluated by the ccNSO Meeting Programme Working Group. A short description of the scheduled presentations will be published online, prior to the meeting. Depending on the amount of submissions, the Programme Working Group cannot always guarantee a speaking slot for all volunteers. No interpretation services will be provided during the ccNSO Members meeting, therefore please take into consideration that presentations are to be held in English. The ccNSO Meeting Programme Working Group looks forward to your feedback. Thank you! Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org

1 2

Re: [ccnso-council] [ccnso-members] FW: EPDP Team Request for Early Input
by Stephen Deerhake Aug. 13, 2018

Aug. 13, 2018

El, By way of my replying, your reply to me has made it to the Council list. One major obstacle to any ccNSO participation was the wording of the request for participation, which (and I believe Katrina touched on this previously) basically stated that whoever did participate from another SO/AC would be considered to be representing the views of that SO/AC. This made it very problematic for ccNSO participation, either by a Council member, but especially so for any member of the ccNSO/ccTLD Community. /Stephen On 8/13/18, 04:46, "Dr Eberhard W Lisse" <el(a)lisse.na> wrote: Stephen, I would have rather preferred this to remain on the list, and I am not sure I can post to the council list in the first place. Please ensure that it arrives on the Council list if I can't. My views are, while I most certainly do not have the time, this could have/should have been put to the members/non members and if there was a volunteer or two, Council could have chosen from them, or not; I also do not agree that this decision (not to participate) is one for Council to make, but for the members. Hence I would appreciate if Council put to the members whether to participate and if there was some interest ask members/non members for volunteers. greetings, el On 13/08/2018 01:21, Stephen Deerhake wrote: > (I've brought this discussion off the ccNSO Community list, but have > left it on the ccNSO council list) > > El, > > As a follow-on to Katrina's comments, let me say that first of all > this is not our concern. If the various houses of the GNSO wish to > wage war on themselves over this, then so be it. The US based > intellectual property (IP) lawyers and Law Enforcement (LE) are > screaming for complete access; the European Regulators are telling > them "No Way". The GTLD registries are caught in the middle: > contractually obligated to ICANN, yet under (sometimes extreme) > pressure from the LE/IP community to ignore these Regulators at great > risk to their financial wellbeing due to the potential fines mandated > under GDPR. > > It was also made clear at some point along the way that the EPDP group > was looking for something like 30 hours per week of active > participation from members, which in my mind was basically a means to > stack it with IP interests from large law firms who could task > personnel to this effort. Sorry to be so cynical, but they have a > track record... > > In my view, the effort of this EPDP will ultimately turn out to be "A > bridge too far". And that conclusion is made independent of ICANN's > recent failures in the German courts to maintain the old "whois > order". > > Become an observer if you are interested; it could well be interesting > given the linkage between the EPDP's chair and ICANN. > > As Katrina stated, the Council considered but rejected becoming an > active participant in the GNSO's EPDP. I supported that decision as a > Council member, and I continue to support it. > > Best Regards > /Stephen [...] -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el(a)lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/

1 0

Re: [ccnso-council] [ccnso-members] FW: EPDP Team Request for Early Input
by Katrina Sataki Aug. 13, 2018

Aug. 13, 2018

Eberhard, >while I most certainly do not have the time, this could have/should have been put to the members/non members and if there was a volunteer or two, Council could have chosen from them, or not; >I also do not agree that this decision (not to participate) is one for Council to make, but for the members. As I already noted in my email, we were given 8 days to seek for volunteers and make a decision. "A volunteer or two" would not suffice. We would need two members and at least one alternate in case a member steps down. Again, as I explained in my email, anything our appointed members would say, was supposed to be an official position of the ccNSO, i.e. everything would have to be accepted by ccNSO members. Even European ccTLDs have opposing views on the ways the requirements of the GDRP should be implemented! The Council considered the short timeframe for the decision, the efforts required, possible volunteers among Councillors, scope of the ccNSO policy as defined in the Bylaws, priorities, and the need for volunteers in other efforts of high importance for ccTLDs (e.g. IFR). As the result, in order not to delay the work of the EPDP team, the ccNSO Council decided not to appoint members but encourage ccTLDs to participate individually. Kind regards, ]{atrina On 13/08/2018 01:21, Stephen Deerhake wrote: > (I've brought this discussion off the ccNSO Community list, but have > left it on the ccNSO council list) > > El, > > As a follow-on to Katrina's comments, let me say that first of all > this is not our concern. If the various houses of the GNSO wish to > wage war on themselves over this, then so be it. The US based > intellectual property (IP) lawyers and Law Enforcement (LE) are > screaming for complete access; the European Regulators are telling > them "No Way". The GTLD registries are caught in the middle: > contractually obligated to ICANN, yet under (sometimes extreme) > pressure from the LE/IP community to ignore these Regulators at great > risk to their financial wellbeing due to the potential fines mandated > under GDPR. > > It was also made clear at some point along the way that the EPDP group > was looking for something like 30 hours per week of active > participation from members, which in my mind was basically a means to > stack it with IP interests from large law firms who could task > personnel to this effort. Sorry to be so cynical, but they have a > track record... > > In my view, the effort of this EPDP will ultimately turn out to be "A > bridge too far". And that conclusion is made independent of ICANN's > recent failures in the German courts to maintain the old "whois > order". > > Become an observer if you are interested; it could well be interesting > given the linkage between the EPDP's chair and ICANN. > > As Katrina stated, the Council considered but rejected becoming an > active participant in the GNSO's EPDP. I supported that decision as a > Council member, and I continue to support it. > > Best Regards > /Stephen [...] -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el(a)lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/

1 0

ICANN63 Barcelona: draft high-level ccNSO schedule
by Joke Braeken Aug. 13, 2018

Aug. 13, 2018

Dear All, This is to inform you about the draft high-level ccNSO schedule for the upcoming ICANN Annual General Meeting (ICANN63) in Barcelona. The AGM runs from 20 to 25 October 2018. The final schedule by ICANN will be published on 1 October 2018. * SATURDAY, 20 OCT ‘18: Working Group Meetings * SUNDAY, 21 OCT ‘18: Working Group Meetings, TLD-OPS workshop (disaster recovery and business continuity) * MONDAY, 22 OCT ‘18: Tech Day * TUESDAY, 23 OCT ‘18: ccNSO Members Meeting, Day 1 * WEDNESDAY, 24 OCT ‘18: ccNSO Members Meeting, Day 2. ccNSO Council meeting Links to bookmark now: * ccNSO Members Meeting: https://community.icann.org/display/ccnsowkspc/ICANN63+%7C+ccNSO+Members+Me… (draft schedule available soon, subject to changes) * Tech Day: https://community.icann.org/display/ccnsowkspc/TechDay+Barcelona+-+Agenda (draft agenda to be published once available) * ccNSO remote participation hub: https://community.icann.org/display/ccnsowkspc/ICANN63+-+Barcelona * ICANN62 meeting website: https://meetings.icann.org/en/barcelona63 (including info regarding transportation, venue map etc.) Please make sure to register for the meeting if you are planning to attend. The comprehensive meeting schedule will be posted on 1 October 2018. Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org

1 0

Re: [ccnso-council] [ccnso-members] FW: EPDP Team Request for Early Input
by Stephen Deerhake Aug. 12, 2018

Aug. 12, 2018

(I've brought this discussion off the ccNSO Community list, but have left it on the ccNSO council list) El, As a follow-on to Katrina's comments, let me say that first of all this is not our concern. If the various houses of the GNSO wish to wage war on themselves over this, then so be it. The US based intellectual property (IP) lawyers and Law Enforcement (LE) are screaming for complete access; the European Regulators are telling them "No Way". The GTLD registries are caught in the middle: contractually obligated to ICANN, yet under (sometimes extreme) pressure from the LE/IP community to ignore these Regulators at great risk to their financial wellbeing due to the potential fines mandated under GDPR. It was also made clear at some point along the way that the EPDP group was looking for something like 30 hours per week of active participation from members, which in my mind was basically a means to stack it with IP interests from large law firms who could task personnel to this effort. Sorry to be so cynical, but they have a track record... In my view, the effort of this EPDP will ultimately turn out to be "A bridge too far". And that conclusion is made independent of ICANN's recent failures in the German courts to maintain the old "whois order". Become an observer if you are interested; it could well be interesting given the linkage between the EPDP's chair and ICANN. As Katrina stated, the Council considered but rejected becoming an active participant in the GNSO's EPDP. I supported that decision as a Council member, and I continue to support it. Best Regards /Stephen On 8/11/18, 13:14, "Dr Eberhard W Lisse" <el(a)lisse.NA> wrote: Katrina, I wasn't thinking of myself. But there are surely some larger ccTLDs which have an opinion and could support the staffing.... greetings, el On 2018-08-11 17:09 , Katrina Sataki wrote: > Eberhard, > > On 12 July, we received a request from the GNSO to appoint two members > and two alternates to the EPDP by 20 July. Members were expected to > have knowledge of GDPR and commit to actively participate in the work > of the EPDP, i.e. devote at least 4-6 hours weekly for at least 6 > months. In addition, it is a requirement of the EPDP charter that > members represent the formal position of their appointing > organization, not individual views or positions. Taking all this into > account, the ccNSO Council decided not to appoint members and > alternates to the EPDP. However, we would like to encourage individual > ccTLDs to share their experience and help the EPDP team to achieve > their goals. > > Please note that the EPDP is open for observers (observers are > subscribed to the mailing list and have the capacity to listen to call > in real-time through an audiocast). > > Kind regards, > > ]{atrina > > > [...] -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el(a)lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/

1 0