October 2010 - council - lists.icann.org

RE: [council] Kurt Question
by Adrian Kinderis 15 Oct '10

15 Oct '10

Kurt, Just following up on the below. Thanks. Adrian Kinderis Chief Executive Officer AusRegistry International Pty Ltd Level 8, 10 Queens Road Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004 Ph: +61 3 9866 3710 Fax: +61 3 9866 1970 Email: adrian(a)ausregistry.com Web: www.ausregistry.com - Follow AusRegistry International on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ausregistryint The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately. -----Original Message----- From: Adrian Kinderis Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:15 AM To: Kurt Pritz Cc: Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Kurt Question Kurt, Thanks for taking the time to respond. Your budget analogy is a good one. I understand that, like the budget, comment from the Community could be accepted and considered all the way up the Board meeting. So, with that in mind are you able to say whether the staff will be putting forward to the Board a "Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook" prior to the December ICANN Meeting? With respect to your idea on the review of comments being limited to certain areas. I like the idea in principle and would be supportive of it. However, as we have seen in the past, no area is off limits to certain community and even those that we considered "locked away" some time ago seem to be reopened at their whim. It may be difficult to roll this out. An answer to the above would be appreciated. Adrian Kinderis -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Pritz [mailto:kurt.pritz@icann.org] Sent: Saturday, 9 October 2010 5:15 AM To: Adrian Kinderis Cc: Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Kurt Question Hi Adrian: Evidently, when the subject line includes the word "Kurt, " the email is labelled as junk. I'm not sure what that means. Bruce is right, of course. The parallel I would draw is with the ICANN budget. ICANN posts a "Proposed Final Budget" prior to the June ICANN meeting. There is comment before and during the meeting that the Board considers. Similarly, with new gTLDs, ICANN could publish a proposed final Guidebook. When proposed, the Board could decide to approve the Guidebook as approved, or to approve it with certain tweaks, or to have more extensive analysis again. As you know, there has been comment and analysis on many, many aspects of the Guidebook. All the comments to date have been addressed, although not always in the way the commenters request. Given the diversity of interests, I think that is impossible. Given the depth of analysis to date and the most recent set of Board resolutions, perhaps review of comments in this next version of the Guidebook be limited in some way to changes in the Guidebook or new topics. What do you think? Kurt On Oct 7, 2010, at 10:52 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > > Thanks Bruce. Very firm. I like it. > > However, it is all in how you look at it. > > The staff can certainly put something forward that they may consider "final" and yes the Board may not approve it. However, the staff could still have thought that they were "final". > > My question was to Kurt, and therefore staff, in that, does he believe that the next version will be the one they expect the Board to sign off on or will it be sent back for public comment. > > A legitimate question given staff's history of announcing that they expect future drafts every time they have released one. > > A response would be appreciated. > > Adrian Kinderis > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin > Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 3:50 PM > To: Council GNSO > Subject: RE: [council] Kurt Question > > > Hello Adrian, > > >>> Does that mean there will be others and the next won't be "final"? > > It will be final when the Board approves it. Until then it is always a > draft. > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > > > >

1 0

FW: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Community Call on FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet SSR - 18 October 2010 at 1800 UTC
by Gomes, Chuck 15 Oct '10

15 Oct '10

Note the following invitation to participate in an ALAC session "to talk about the FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability and Resiliency". Chuck From: Cheryl Langdon-Orr [mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:24 AM To: Chris Disspain; Gomes, Chuck Subject: Fwd: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Community Call on FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet SSR - 18 October 2010 at 1800 UTC FYI as with all our community briefing calls this is open for ANYONE to join so some of your community might be interested and of course your Council(s) or Excom (selves) are also more than welcome... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Date: 14 October 2010 12:10 Subject: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Community Call on FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet SSR - 18 October 2010 at 1800 UTC To: "alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Dear All, Further to the Doodle poll, the AtLarge Community is invited to join Patrick Jones, ICANN's acting coordinator of the Security group, to talk about the FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability and Resiliency on Monday 18 October 2010 at 1800 UTC (1100 PDT, 1400 EDT, 15:00 Buenos Aires, 1900 London, 2000 CEST, 0200 Hong Kong, 0500 Sydney) ICANN developed a Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability & Resiliency<http://icann.org/en/topics/ssr/ssr-draft-plan-fy11-13sep10-en.pdf> in the 2009-2010 operational year. Patrick will review the FY11 version of this plan which is intended as a baseline document for ICANN and its community for organizing its security, stability and resiliency efforts. The plan does not envision major new roles or programs for ICANN in this area. Patrick will review the plan that delineates ICANN's specific programs that address the security, stability and resiliency of the Internet's naming andaddressing systems and discuss the activities planned for the 2011 fiscal year. The draft agenda (to be updated) and participation instructions are available at: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/SSR+Briefing+Call Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/ssr/ Please let us know if you require a dial-out by emailing: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org. This call will be held in English only due to insufficient demand for interpretation. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, Kristina Nordström ICANN At-Large Staff _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Draft Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 28 October 2010.
by Glen de Saint Géry 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 28 October 2010. http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-28oct10-en.htm https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?proposed_agenda_28_october_2010 This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 5 August 2010 for the GNSO Council. http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-05aug10-en.pdf For convenience: * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. Meeting Time 20:00 UTC See the following and http://www.timeanddate.com/ for other times: 13:00 PDT; 15:00 CDT; 16:00 EST; 17:00 Buenos Aires; 17:00 Brazil; 22:00 CET; 24:00 Moscow Friday, 29 October 01:00 Pakistan; 04:00 Hong Kong; 05:00 Tokyo, 07:00 Melbourne Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (15 minutes) 1.1 Roll call of Council members and polling for Disclosures of Interest * Per the GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 5.4, we are required to poll Councilors regarding "any direct or indirect interests that may affect a Relevant Party's judgment on an issue that is under review, consideration, or discussion" in this meeting. Here is the definition provided in the procedures: "Disclosure of Interest: Relevant to a specific issue at a specific time. A written statement made by a Relevant Party of direct and indirect interests that may be commercial (e.g. monetary payment) or non-commercial (e.g. non-tangible benefit such as publicity, political or academic visibility) and may affect, or be perceived to affect, the Relevant Party's judgment on a specific issue." The main issue for this meeting is * GNSO Prioritization 1.2 Update any statements of interest 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: * 7 October 2010 meeting minutes - Approved on 28 October 2010. Item 2: GNSO Project Prioritization (20 minutes) 2.1 Refer to posted project ratings<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/new-gtld-applicant-support-draft-recom…>: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-work-prioritization-project-list-value-r… 2.2 Key points made in the 15 July Council meeting (from meeting minutes): * ". . . not a useful exercise, not much was learnt, should not proceed further with the prioritization exercise." * ". . . spending more time on the exercise will not accomplish useful results." * "It was a difficult exercise, policy matters were not prioritized and the core issue, management of the workload, still has not been resolved." * "The exercise was intended as a first step and not intended to solve the workload management; other steps are needed. The exercise contributed an important degree of common awareness and dissent to the group." * "The prioritization process could be improved with further input from the Councilors and stakeholder groups." * "The exercise is important and informative from a staff perspective and the Council needs to look at a two-step process going forward: step one - form a small team to improve the process used to date drawing on input received; step two - develop a process to manage the workload with input from staff of the resources being used to support each of the working groups, which will reflect both staff and community efforts." * "Support was expressed for continuing the prioritization work, but linking it to the overall ICANN Staff and Community workload and to the Budget process." * "The question of available resources should be looked at in context. The Vertical Integration working group as an example of one that would not normally have commenced with all the work before Council, yet it did and the community resources were available." * "Some believe that work should be prioritized but the methodology chosen is not the most appropriate or efficient." 2.3 Next Steps * Staff Utilization Analysis (Liz Gasster) Refer to: http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/gnso-council-resource-management-polic… * Results of Adobe Connect Poll regarding possible next steps: o Option 1: Spend no more time on prioritization - 5 votes (33%) o Option 2: Develop a plan for using the results to manage the workload in the near term - 2 votes (13%) o Option 3: Form a drafting team with the task of developing a new process - 0 votes (0%) o Option 4: Form a drafting team with the task of improving the process - 1 vote (7%) o Option 5: Other? (including combinations of options 2, 3, and or 4) - 7 votes (47%) * Discussion? * Action Items Item 3: Whois Study #3 - WHOIS Privacy and Proxy Abuse (15 minutes) Refer to: The Abuse Study Staff Analysis http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/gnso-whois-pp-abuse-studies-report-05oct… 3.1 Status Report (Liz Gasster) 3.2 Discussion 3.3 Next steps? Item 4: Absentee Voting Procedures (25 minutes) 4.1 Overview (Ken Bour, Staff; Ray Fassett, GNSO Council Operations Work Team (GCOT) Chair) 4.2 Discussion 4.3 Report from Operations Steering Committee/ GNSO Council Operations Work Team (OSC/GCOT) (Philip Sheppard, OSC Chair; Ray Fassett) 4.4 Next steps? Item 5: Disclosure of Interest Procedures (15 minutes) 5.1 Report from OSC/GCOT (Philip Sheppard, Ray Fassett) 5.2 Discussion 5.3 Next steps? Item 6: Planning for Cartagena Meetings (15 minutes) 6.1 Overview of plans/schedule (Stéphane Van Gelder, Glen de Saint Géry) 6.2 Next steps? Item 7: Status of Continued Action Items (10 Minutes) 7.1 Drafting team for draft DNS-CERT/SSR WG charter (Chuck Gomes) 7.2 Standing committee to monitor GNSO Improvements implementation (Glen de Saint Géry) * Volunteers to date: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (ISCPC), Tatyana Khramtsova (RrSG), Ray Fassett (RySG), Avri Doria (NCSG), Rudi Vansnick (NCSG), Philip Sheppard (CBUC) * Feedback from Steering Committees (Rob Hoggarth) * Question raised regarding GNSO Operating Procedures: Should the concerns about the newly approved disclosure of interest requirements be dealt with by the OSC & GCOT or by the standing committee? * Next steps? Charter? 7.3 Progress of House/SG Elections * Councilors * Chair & Vice Chair Nominations * NCA Assignments 7.4 Whois Studies * Refer to redline version of Proxy/Privacy Reveal study (Study 4) RFP at http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29sep10-en.htm * Status of Whois Study 4, WHOIS Privacy/Proxy Relay & Reveal Study (Liz Gasster) Item 8: Other Business (5 Minutes) Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3) 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: 1. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than 25% vote of each House or majority of one House; 2. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than 33% of each House or more than 66% of one House; 3. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than 75% of one House and a majority of the other House ("GNSO Supermajority"); 4. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation; 5. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority; and 6. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded with respect to any contracting party affected by such contract provision. Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (Council Operating Procedures 4.4) Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on the following items may vote by absentee ballot: 1. Initiate a policy development process; 2. Forward a policy recommendation to the Board; 3. Recommend amendments to the ICANN Bylaws; 4. Fill a position open for election. The GNSO Secretariat will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, or web-based interface. Absentee ballots must be submitted within 72 hours following the start of the meeting in which a vote is initiated, except that, in exceptional circumstances announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 days. There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated. ________________________________________ Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere ________________________________________ Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) 20:00UTC ________________________________________ California, USA (PST) UTC-8+1DST 13:00 Cedar Rapids, USA (CDT) UTC-6+1DST 15:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 16:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 17:00 Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-3+0DST 17:00 Dublin, Ireland (GMT) UTC+0DST 21:00 Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+1DST 22:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 22:00 Moscow, Russian Federation (MSK) UTC+3+0DST 00:00 next day Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 01:00 next day Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 04:00 next day Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 05:00 next day Melbourne/Sydney Australia (EDT) UTC+10+1DST 07:00 next day ________________________________________ The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2010, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Draft minutes GNSO Council meeting on 7 October 2010.
by Glen de Saint Géry 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 7 October 2010. Please let me know if you would like any changes made. If no comments are received, these minutes will be published, as approved on the website on page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/index.html#oct on Monday, 25 October 2010. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Motion and Document Deadline - Wednesday, 20 October 2010 for Council meeting on 28 October 2010
by Glen de Saint Géry 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

Dear Councillors, As required in the GNSO Operating Procedures, motions and reports for consideration in the GNSO Council meeting on 28 October 2010 are due not later than 8 days in advance of that meeting, that is, Wednesday, 20 October 2010. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Updated: Request for Information Issued on Proposed High Security Zone Verification Program
by Glen de Saint Géry 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-22sep10-en.htm Updated: Request for Information Issued on Proposed High Security Zone Verification Program Updated 13 October 2010 22 September 2010 ICANN is updating today this posting on the Request for Information (RFI) [PDF, 432 KB] for the proposed High Security Zone Verification Program (the "HSTLD Program"). The purpose of the RFI is to assist the ICANN community in understanding potential frameworks and approaches to evaluate new gTLD registries against the criteria in the draft HSTLD Program, determine where improvements to draft criteria and the overall program may be necessary to ensure its success, and to assess the viability of the proposed HSTLD Program. ICANN, in cooperation with its community-led Advisory Group, has developed a proposed voluntary HSTLD Program consisting of control elements to increase security and trust in the Domain Name System (DNS) for those Top-Level Domain (TLD) registry operators that elect to participate in the program. This proposed program has been identified as one of nine measures intended to mitigate malicious conduct in new gTLDs. For additional information about the HSTLD Program or the Advisory Group, please see the concept paper, Model for a High Security Zone Verification Program [PDF, 214 KB], the Public Archive of HSTLD Proceedings, and the Draft Program Development Snapshot #2 - High Security Zone Top-Level Domain Advisory Group (HSTLD Advisory Group) [PDF, 771 KB]. Respondents should pay careful attention to Appendix A of Snapshot #2 [PDF, 343 KB] as it outlines potential control elements for registries, registrars and registrants in the proposed HSTLD Program. Respondents are requested to reply to hstldrfi(a)icann.org by 23 November 2010. Questions about the RFI should be submitted to the same email address by 27 October 2010. In response to inquiries ICANN has received about the RFI, a conference call will be convened shortly after 27 October 2010, to respond to questions. Participation in the call will be open to anyone that submitted questions prior to 27 October 2010. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Public Comment extended to 3 November: FY 11 Update to Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability & Resiliency
by Glen de Saint Géry 13 Oct '10

13 Oct '10

**Please note that the Public Comment Period has been extended to 3 NOVEMBER 2010 23:59 UTC.** Public Comment: FY 11 Update to Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability & Resiliency http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13sep10-en.htm Updated 4 October 2010 13 September 2010 4 October 2010 Update – ICANN is providing an update to the public comment period on the FY 11 SSR Plan, with the posting of translations in Arabic, French, Russian and Spanish (note – the Chinese translation will be added early next week). Accordingly, the comment period is being extended to 3 November 2010 23:59 UTC. In June 2009, the ICANN Board accepted the first ICANN Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability & Resiliency. ICANN is today releasing an update for FY 11. The plan delineates ICANN's specific programs that will address security, stability and resiliency. It also details planned activities that will enhance its contributions through the 2010-2011 operational year. This plan is an update from the initial plan published in May 2009 and is intended as a baseline document for ICANN and its community for organizing its security, stability and resiliency efforts. The plan does not envision major new roles or programs for ICANN in this area from the programs described in the FY 10 version of the Plan. The programs and initiatives in which ICANN plans to engage during the 2010-2011 Operating year include: * Improving root zone management through automation; improve authentication of communications with TLD managers and continued support for the adoption of DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) following the implementation of DNSSEC in the root zone in July 2010 * Improving ICANN's Global Security Engagement with key stakeholders and partners * Building on the collaborative efforts of the Internet security community efforts to effectively respond to malicious abuses of the Domain Name System (DNS) Comments on the Plan [PDF, 2.52 MB] are welcomed through 13 October 2010 3 November 2010 23:59 UTC. Comments may be submitted at ssr-plan-fy11(a)icann.org address and viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/ssr-plan-fy11/ address. Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability, and Resiliency (FY 11): * العربية [PDF, 1.76 MB] * 中文 (to be added) * English [PDF, 2.52 MB] * Français [PDF, 1.65 MB] * Русский [PDF, 1.79 MB] * Español [PDF, 2.62 MB] Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Kurt Question
by Adrian Kinderis 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

He says "next version of book". Does that mean there will be others and the next won't be "final"? Adrian Kinderis

5 8

ccNSO Update - ccNSO ICANN Board Nomination Results
by Olga Cavalli 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

Hi, The nomination period for a ccNSO representative to the ICANN Board ended last week. The only nominee was Chris Disspain, who accepted the nomination. The nomination report is available at *http://www.ccnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-11oct10-en.htm * Chris will take the seat on the ICANN Board afther the ICANN meeting in June 2011. Best regards Olga

1 0

FW: Scheduling request - ICANN TLG discussion
by Gomes, Chuck 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

Please note that I have asked to participate in an interview for the independent review of the ICANN TLG. If anyone has any input regarding this that you would like me to communicate, please let me know this week. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Schmidt [mailto:jschmidt@jascommunications.com] Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 8:58 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: William Yang Subject: Scheduling request - ICANN TLG discussion Chuck: JAS Communications LLC has been engaged to perform the independent review of the TLG and has been tasked to deliver a final report prior to the ICANN meeting in Cartagena. We would like to set a time for a telephonic interview with you in the next two weeks to discuss your opinions, observations, and experiences with the TLG. To facilitate scheduling, please respond with three dates in the time slots below when you have 30 minutes of availability. We will confirm the appointment within 24 hours. Monday thru Friday: 1100 - 1400 UTC Monday and Thursday: 2000 - 2300 UTC During our interview, we are interested in: (1) understanding the historical operations and impact of the TLG; (2) the role the TLG plays in the relationship between ICANN, ETSI, ITU, W3C, and IAB; and (3) your thoughts on how to improve the TLG in the future. Please consider these questions prior to our appointment, and please feel at ease during our conversation as all discussions are confidential and data are presented without attribution. Furthermore, please be aware that we will be opening an online survey in October and will invite your participation in that forum as well. Finally, we invite comments by email at any time by anyone with opinions or experiences about the TLG. Please email tlg-review(a)jascommunications.com. Please feel free to share with the GNSO. We recognize this is a very tight timeline and we sincerely appreciate your willingness to accommodate scheduling prior to 24-Sept. Please feel free to reach out to us or to our ICANN Liaison Olof Nordling with questions or comments about the review process. Please also note that a web page has been established for Organizational Review matters at http://www.icann.org/en/reviews. Thank you, Jeff Schmidt<jschmidt(a)jascommunications.com> William Yang<wyang(a)jascommunications.com> JAS Communications LLC

1 0