Dear Community Requests Team, The below request was sent to a representative of the NCSG prior to the institution of the Community Requests process. We have not received a response and would like to follow up. Could you please advise as to whether we should continue to correspond directly with Rafik, or if we should submit the follow-up to you? Thank you, Trang From: Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 2:50 PM To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Cc: Amy Creamer <amy.creamer@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] objection regarding IFR Dear Rafik, Thank you for your email. I hope you are well. As clarification, the letter asked that the appointing organizations, NCSG being one, address the two remaining issues with the composition of the Review Team. Thanks for letting me know that the NCSG has concerns about the ccNSO interim appointment. For transparency, might it be possible for the NCSG to send a formal letter noting its objection and any rationale? It would also be great if the other appointing organizations are in copied so that they are aware of the NCSG’s objection. Thanks, Rafik! Trang From: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Date: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 1:10 PM To: Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] objection regarding IFR Hi Trang, I am sending this regarding the ccNSO proposal in IFR RT. I understand that NCSG members are strongly against the proposal and are for following the bylaws. I am not sure about the process for this and from letter it seems there was a deadline. There was misunderstanding at GNSO level if response was expected from council or the SG/C individually. Best Regards, Rafik