August 2011 - council - lists.icann.org

Fwd: GAC inputs on UDRP and protections for the IOC and Red Cross
by Stéphane Van Gelder 17 Aug '11

17 Aug '11

Councillors, FYI. Envoyé de mon iPhone4 Début du message transféré : > Expéditeur: <Heather.Dryden(a)ic.gc.ca> > Date: 17 août 2011 05:09:17 HAEC > Destinataire: <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Cc: <maria.hall(a)enterprise.ministry.se>, <steve(a)shinkuro.com> > Objet: GAC inputs on UDRP and protections for the IOC and Red Cross > > Dear Stephane, > > I know you are on vacation at the moment but I wanted to give you some advance notice that the GAC is working on proposals regarding reviewing the UDRP and IOC and Red Cross protections. We intend to provide these inputs to the GNSO by August 31st. As I will be away and not connected, Maria Hall, GAC vice-chair, will forward on my behalf and copy the Board Chair, Steve Crocker (as the GAC formally advises the Board at ICANN). > > I am copying Maria and Steve on this note so that everyone is in the loop. > > Thanks, > Heather > > >

1 0

Fwd: Joint Applicant Support Working Group additional support staff
by Stéphane Van Gelder 17 Aug '11

17 Aug '11

Councillors, FYI: details of additional resources being directed at the JAS WG. Thanks, Stéphane Envoyé de mon iPhone4 Début du message transféré : > Expéditeur: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> > Date: 15 août 2011 09:45:50 HAEC > Destinataire: Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com> > Cc: ALAC EXCOM <alac-excom(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org>, Karla Valente <karla.valente(a)icann.org>, Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Objet: Joint Applicant Support Working Group additional support staff > > Dear JAS WG Co-Chairs, > > After having spoken to Rod Beckstrom and an exchange of emails with Kurt > Pritz, I am pleased to be able to inform you of additional staff members > who will join the JAS WG support team in order to somehow ease the > pressure on the current staff and volunteers. Whilst I am well aware > that the concept of "man-days" does not always apply, I believe that the > additional staff members bring the skills and experience to the JAS > table which the writing Team should be able to exploit immediately, > especially given the extremely short deadlines which the WG is faced with. > > I therefore resort to both of you, Carlton and Rafik, to incorporate the > new arrivals to the JAS WG as soon as possible, whether by integrating > them on the WG calls, the WG post-calls, etc. > > First, Rob Hoggarth from Policy Development Support will pick up > drafting for the final report. Karen Lentz will provide editing > assistance. Dan Halloran will join the team to identify and take back > legal issues that arise. In making these selections, Rod and Kurt tried > to find those individuals that would best ensure the success of the > group and I am grateful for them taking the time to study this > carefully. In addition, Lynn Lipinski from the ICANN communications > staff will remain on the staff support team and undertake the writing of > public information about the process as previously agreed. Karla and > Seth will also continue to support the team in their current roles. > > These additions are effective immediately and we expect to see a > beneficial effect right away. I gather that current staff for the WG can > integrate newcomers ASAP and trust that this will give a bit more oxygen > to the current WG members to breathe once in a while. > > In the meantime, please let me know if there is anything else that the > ALAC can do to help to catalyse the production of the JAS Final Report. > > Kind regards, > > Olivier Crepin-Leblond > ALAC Chair >

2 1

Rod Beckstrom to leave ICANN at the end of his term
by Bruce Tonkin 16 Aug '11

16 Aug '11

Hello All, From: http://www.icann.org/en/news/releases/release-16aug11-en.pdf August 16, 2011 BECKSTROM TO LEAVE ICANN AT END OF HIS TERM Rod Beckstrom will continue to fulfill his term as ICANN's President and CEO, which will be completed on 1 July 2012. He has held this position since 1 July 2009. "I am incredibly proud of ICANN's achievements throughout my tenure," said Beckstrom. "In two short years we have advanced this organization to a new level of professionalism and productivity, and turned it into a genuinely multinational organization that will serve the world community long after my time here." Beckstrom has had many notable accomplishments at ICANN. They include the negotiation and signing of the Affirmation of Commitments, the historic 2009 agreement with the US Government that moved ICANN's oversight from one government to the world, and the signing of the Internet's root with DNSSEC. The introduction of internationalized domain names under his watch has allowed millions of Internet users to access the Internet entirely in their primary language script. "I can summarize my time here in four words: strong execution, great teambuilding," he said. "We have built a world-class executive team, and elevated ICANN's stature through strategic relationships with governments, businesses, top technology firms and international organizations." A program to launch new generic top-level domains - a major change to the domain name system - was approved in June and will launch in the next year. ICANN's agreement with the US government - the IANA functions contract - expires in March, and Beckstrom emphasized his commitment to bring the contract renewal to a successful conclusion. Steve Crocker, Chair of ICANN's Board of Directors, said: "The Board of Directors fully supports Rod through the completion of his July 2012 term and is committed to continuing the collaboration that has produced so many benefits for ICANN and for the global Internet." Beckstrom continued: "I remain committed to leading this critical organization with the utmost dedication, and to living up to our common vision: One world, one Internet."

1 0

Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Recommendations for ICANN Board Consideration - call for comments
by Glen de Saint Géry 16 Aug '11

16 Aug '11

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-15aug11-en.htm Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Recommendations for ICANN Board Consideration Comment Period Deadlines (*) Important Information Links Public Comment Box<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/pednr-board-recommendations-15aug11-…> Open Date: 15 August 2011 To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:pednr-board-recommendations@icann.org> Close Date: 15 September 2011 Time (UTC): 23:59 UTC View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/pednr-board-recommendations/> Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) approved<http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201107> at its meeting on 21 July 2011 the recommendations on the Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Policy Development Process (PDP). The resolution, which is pending for Board action, proposes: * Define 'Registered Name Holder at Expiration' (RNHaE) as the entity or individual that was eligible to renew the domain name registration immediately prior to expiration. If the domain name registration was modified pursuant to a term of the Registration Agreement authorizing the modification of registration data for the purposes of facilitating renewal but not at the explicit request of the registrant, the RNHaE is the entity or individual identified as the registrant immediately prior to that modification. * For at least 8 consecutive days, at some point following expiration, the original DNS resolution path specified by the RNHaE, at the time of expiration, must be interrupted1 by the registrar, to the extent that the registry permits such interruptions 1, and the domain must be renewable by the RNHaE until the end of that period. This 8-day period may occur at any time following expiration. At any time during the 8 day period, the Registered Name Holder at Expiration may renew the domain with the Registrar and the Registrar, within a commercially reasonable delay, will restore the domain name to resolve to its original DNS resolution path prior to expiration. Notwithstanding, the Registrar may delete the domain at any time during the Autorenew grace period. * If at any time after expiration when the Registered Name is still renewable by the RNHaE, the Registrar changes the DNS resolution path to effect a different landing website than the one used by the RNHaE prior to expiration, the page shown must explicitly say that the domain has expired and give instructions on how to recover the domain. Wording in the policy must make clear that ¡°instructions¡± may be as simple as directing the RNHaE to a specific web site. * The RNHaE cannot be prevented from renewing a domain name registration as a result of WHOIS changes made by the Registrar that were not at the RNHaE.s request. * The registration agreement must include or point to any fee(s) charged for the post expiration renewal of a domain name. If the Registrar operates a website for registration or renewal, it should state, both at the time of registration and in a clear place on its website, any fee(s) charged for the post-expiration renewal of a domain name or the recovery of a domain name during the Redemption Grace Period. * The registration agreement and Registrar web site (if one is used) must clearly indicate what methods will be used to deliver pre- and post-expiration notifications, or must point to the location where such information can be found. What destination address/number will be used must also be specified, if applicable. * Registrar must notify Registered Name Holder of impending expiration no less than two times. One such notice must be sent one month or 30 days prior to expiration (+/- 4 days) and one must be sent one week prior to expiration (+/- 3 days). If more that two alert notifications are sent, the timing of two of them must be comparable to the timings specified. * Unless the Registered Name is renewed or deleted by the Registrar, at least one notification to the RNHaE, which includes renewal instructions, must be sent after expiration. * Notifications of impending expiration must include method(s) that do not require explicit registrant action other than standard e-mail receipt in order to receive such notifications. * With the exception of sponsored gTLDs, all gTLD Registries shall offer the Redemption Grace Period (RGP). For currently existing unsponsored gTLDs that do not currently offer the RGP, a transition period shall be allowed. All new gTLDs must offer the RGP. As part of the implementation, ICANN Staff should consider the Technical Steering Group's Implementation Proposal (see http://www.icann.org/en/meetings/bucharest/redemption-topic.htm) * If a Registrar offers registrations in a gTLD that supports the RGP, the Registrar must allow the Registered Name Holder at Expiration to redeem the Registered Name after it has entered RGP. * A transfer of a domain name during the RGP should not be allowed. * In the event that ICANN gives reasonable notice to Registrars that ICANN has published web content as described in PEDNR Recommendation #16: * Registrars, who have a web presence, must provide a link to the ICANN content on any website it may operate for domain name registration or renewal clearly displayed to its Registered Name Holders at least as clearly as its links to policies or notifications required to be displayed under ICANN Consensus Policies. * Registrars may also host similar material adapted to their specific practices and processes. * Registrar must point to the ICANN material in a communication sent to the registrant immediately following initial registration as well as in the mandated annual WHOIS reminder. Note: Some of these recommendations may need special consideration in the context of existing provisions in the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), the proposed Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS) or exceptions due to fraud, breach of registration agreement or other substantive reasons and the GNSO Council, therefore, recommends that such considerations are taken into account as part of the implementation of these recommendations, once adopted. * The GNSO Council recommends the following best practices for promotion by ICANN and the Registrar Stakeholder Group: * If post-expiration notifications are normally sent to a point of contact using the domain in question, and delivery is known to have been interrupted by post-expiration actions, post-expiration notifications should be sent to some other contact point associated with the registrant if one exists. * The notification method explanation should include the registrar's email address from which notification messages are sent and a suggestion that registrants save this email address as a 'safe sender' to avoid notification emails being blocked by spam filter software. * Registrars should advise registrants to provide a secondary email point of contact that is not associated with the domain name itself so that in case of expiration reminders can be delivered to this secondary email point of contact. * The GNSO Council recommends that ICANN, in consultation with Registrars, ALAC and other interested parties, will develop educational materials about how to properly steward a domain name and how to prevent unintended loss. Such material may include registrant responsibilities and the gTLD domain life-cycle and guidelines for keeping domain name records current. (PEDNR Recommendation #16). * ICANN Compliance is requested to provide updates to the GNSO Council on a regular basis in relation to the implementation and effectiveness of the proposed recommendations, either in the form of a report that details amongst others the number of complaints received in relation to renewal and/or post-expiration related matters or in the form of audits that assess if the policy has been implemented as intended. * The GNSO Council shall convene a PEDNR Implementation Review Team to assist ICANN Staff in developing the implementation details for the new policy should it be approved by the ICANN Board. The Implementation Review Team will be tasked with evaluating the proposed implementation of the policy recommendations as approved by the Board and is expected to work with ICANN Staff to ensure that the resultant implementation meets the letter and intent of the approved policy. If the PEDNR Implementation Review Team identifies any potential modifications to the policy or new PEDNR policy recommendations, the PEDNR Implementation Review Team shall refer these to the GNSO Council for its consideration and follow-up, as appropriate. Following adoption by the ICANN Board of the recommendations, the GNSO Secretariat is authorized to issue a call for volunteers for a PEDNR Implementation Review Team to the members of the PEDNR Working Group. You are invited to submit your comments on these recommendations until 15 September before final consideration by the ICANN Board. Section II: Background At the ICANN Meeting in Cairo in November 2008, the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), voted to request an Issues Report on the subject of registrants being able to recover domain names after their formal expiration date. The ALAC request was submitted to ICANN policy staff and the GNSO Council on 20 November 2008. The Issues Report on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/post-expiration-recovery/report-05dec08.pdf> [PDF, 422 KB] was submitted to the GNSO Council on 5 December 2008. The GNSO Council initiated a PDP<http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#200905> on 7 May 2009 and tasked a Working Group to answer the following charter questions: * Whether adequate opportunity exists for registrants to redeem their expired domain names; * Whether expiration-related provisions in typical registration agreements are clear and conspicuous enough; * Whether adequate notice exists to alert registrants of upcoming expirations; * Whether additional measures need to be implemented to indicate that once a domain name enters the Auto-Renew Grace Period, it has expired (e.g., hold status, a notice on the site with a link to information on how to renew, or other options to be determined); * Whether to allow the transfer of a domain name during the RGP. The Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery (PEDNR) PDP Working Group started its deliberations in July 2009. The WG published an Initial Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pednr/pednr-initial-report-31may10-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.02 MB], a Proposed Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pednr/pednr-proposed-final-report-21feb11-en.p…> [PDF, 972 KB] and submitted its Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pednr-final-report-14jun11-en.pdf> [PDF, 999 KB] to the GNSO Council on 14 June 2011. The GNSO Council unanimously approved all the recommendations contained in the Final Report at its meeting on 21 July 2011. Section III: Document and Resource Links * GNSO Council Resolution on the Adoption of the PEDNR Final Report and Recommendations<http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201107> * PEDNR Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pednr-final-report-14jun11-en.pdf> [PDF, 998 KB] * PEDNR PDP Proposed Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pednr/pednr-proposed-final-report-21feb11-en.p…> [PDF, 972 KB] * PEDNR PDP Initial Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pednr/pednr-initial-report-31may10-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.02 MB] Section IV: Additional Information None Staff Contact: Marika Konings Email: policy.staff(a)icann.org<mailto:policy.staff@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Post-Expiration%20Domain%20Name%20Recovery%20Recommendations%20for%20ICANN%20Board%20Consideration%20public%20comment%20period> Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Re: Board's June 20 2011 resolution on new gTLDs
by Stéphane Van Gelder 13 Aug '11

13 Aug '11

Thanks for that update Heather. Copying the GNSO Council list so that everyone is on the same page. Enjoy your holiday and I look forward to discussing this topic further when you are back. Stéphane Envoyé de mon iPhone4 Le 13 août 2011 à 01:17, <Heather.Dryden(a)ic.gc.ca> a écrit : > > Thank you, Stephane, for your email regarding the GAC's possible approach to that portion of the ICANN Board's Resolution on new gTLDs that deals with the IOC/Red Cross requests for protection at the top and second levels in new gTLDs. Based on the Board's announced moratorium on applications for the IOC and Red Cross terms in the first round, the GAC is developing a proposal to protect the IOC and Red Cross terms covered in international legal instruments and national laws. > > We hope to finalize the proposal in the next several weeks, with a view to sharing it with the GNSO Council prior to your next call on September 8. > > I am now leaving for vacation and will be back at the beginning of September so will be in touch then. > > Best regards, > Heather > > > ________________________________ > > From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 2:27 PM > To: Dryden, Heather: SPS > Subject: Board's June 20 2011 resolution on new gTLDs > > > Dear Heather, > > As you know, as part of its resolutions on the new gTLD program, the ICANN Board passed a resolved clause during its June 20 meeting in Singapore which contained the following excerpt (Resolved 1.b): > > Incorporation of text concerning protection for specific requested Red Cross and IOC names for the top level only during the initial application round, until the GNSO and GAC develop policy advice based on the global public interest. > > The GNSO Council discussed this during its July 21 teleconference and has requested that I write to you in my capacity as Chair to enquire as to how the GAC intends to respond to the Board's resolution. > > > Our next teleconference is scheduled for September 8 and we plan to discuss this topic again during that meeting, so any response you can provide before that date would be much appreciated. > > > Regards, > > > Stéphane Van Gelder > GNSO Council Chair > > >

1 0

IRTP Part B GNSO Council Report to the Board
by Marika Konings 12 Aug '11

12 Aug '11

Dear All, As requested, please find attached the IRTP Part B GNSO Council Report to the Board that has been submitted to the ICANN Board in combination with the Board Paper. The Board Paper will normally be published following Board consideration of this issue (note that the executive summary of the Council Report to the Board is identical to the one in the Board Paper). With best regards, Marika

1 0

July 21 Council minutes posted on website
by Glen de Saint Géry 09 Aug '11

09 Aug '11

Dear Council Members, Please note that the minutes of the Council meeting on 21 July 2011 http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-council-21jul11-en.htm have been posted as approved on the web site on page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar#jul according to the GNSO Operating Procedures http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-08apr11-en.pdf "Within 10 days of the meeting, the Chair and Vice-Chairs will edit the draft and request the Secretariat to circulate the draft summary to GNSO Council members for comment and approval. All comments received will be accepted for inclusion into the draft minutes unless there are objections. If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting." Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

ICANN 2011 Nominating Committee Announces Selections
by Glen de Saint Géry 05 Aug '11

05 Aug '11

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-05aug11-en.htm ICANN 2011 Nominating Committee Announces Selections 5 August 2011 The 2011 ICANN Nominating Committee (NomCom) has completed its selections for eight leadership positions within ICANN. The NomCom's Chair, Adam Peake, said "We are very pleased to have been able to select such high quality people to join ICANN. They are a great group, bringing skills and experience that will serve the community well. It's been a tough job, the NomCom had to choose from a very strong applicant pool, with many highly qualified candidates for every position, including a record number of female applicants. After many hours of teleconferences and meetings, and then almost two and half days of discussion locked away in a room in Singapore, we reached unanimous agreement on all the selected nominees and the overall slate that includes individuals from China, Germany, Jamaica, Malaysia, Nigeria, Philippines and United States. Thanks to my committee for their hard work, and on behalf of all the NomCom a very sincere Thank You to all 88 candidates who gave their time and effort in volunteering to help ICANN". The NomCom is charged with recruiting and selecting a portion of ICANN's leadership. The NomCom is mandated to ensure that overall, ICANN's leadership is diverse in geography, culture, skills, experience, and perspective. The basic criteria is that selectees are people of integrity, objectivity and sound judgment, can support decision-making within groups, can work effectively in English, have an understanding of ICANN's mission and operation, are committed to its success, experienced in world affairs, contribute to cultural, professional and geographic expertise, and can work long and hard as volunteers in the global public trust. The NomCom evaluated over eighty-eight candidates, many of whom with exceptional qualifications in relation to the key criteria as set out in the ICANN Bylaws. With such a rich pool of candidates and very few seats to fill, the NomCom found itself unable to appoint all the applicants the Committee members would have desired to see on the Board and on the other bodies. ________________________________ Selectees listed for each ICANN body, in alphabetical order by family name. ICANN Board of Directors Steve Crocker<http://www.icann.org/en/biog/nomcom-bios-05aug11-en.htm#stephen-crocker>, United States Judith Vasquez<http://www.icann.org/en/biog/nomcom-bios-05aug11-en.htm#judith-duavit-vazqu…>, Philippines ALAC Titi Akinsanmi<http://www.icann.org/en/biog/nomcom-bios-05aug11-en.htm#titi-akinsanmi>, Nigeria Rinalia Abdul Rahim<http://www.icann.org/en/biog/nomcom-bios-05aug11-en.htm#rinalia-abdul-rahim>, Malaysia Carlton Samuels<http://www.icann.org/en/biog/nomcom-bios-05aug11-en.htm#carlton-samuels>, Jamaica GNSO Council Lanre Ajayi<http://www.icann.org/en/biog/nomcom-bios-05aug11-en.htm#lanre-ajayi>, Nigeria Thomas Rickert<http://www.icann.org/en/biog/nomcom-bios-05aug11-en.htm#thomas-rickert>, Germany ccNSO Council Hong Xue<http://www.icann.org/en/biog/nomcom-bios-05aug11-en.htm#hong-xue>, China These individuals will take up their positions after the end of ICANN's Annual General Meeting in Dakar, Senegal, on 28 October 2011. This year's Nominating Committee received 88 Statements of Interest from candidates all over the world (23 female and 65 male), during its open nomination period from 17 December 2010 to 4 April 2011. The regional breakdown of this year's candidates is: * 19 from Africa, * 24 from Asia/Australia/Pacific * 14 from Europe * 15 from Latin America/Caribbean * 16 from North America For more information about the NomCom, please visit http://nomcom.icann.org/ Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RE: [council] Letter to GAC and ccNSO re Consumer metrics
by john＠crediblecontext.com 03 Aug '11

03 Aug '11

1 0

RE: [council] Re: Letter to GAC and ccNSO re Consumer metrics
by Tim Ruiz 03 Aug '11

03 Aug '11

I have similar concerns. In any event, I would rather we first vote on the motion so we know which way we intend to go with it. That way the letter can be clear and cause no confusion or misunderstanding. Tim > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [council] Re: Letter to GAC and ccNSO re Consumer metrics > From: StÃ©phane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Date: Mon, August 01, 2011 3:43 am > To: Rosemary Sinclair <rosemary.sinclair(a)unsw.edu.au> > Cc: "council(a)gnso.icann.org GNSO" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > Hi Rosemary, > > Thanks for your request. I am copying the Council on my response > because I think this is a discussion we should all be having. > > Let me start by saying how much I appreciate your efforts as leader of > the GNSO Council's Consumer metrics initiative. I'm sure all Councillors > feel the same way. > > What I am not sure of, however, is that all would feel comfortable with > me sending the letter you have drafted as-is. My understanding is that > we as a Council have yet to determine whether we are comfortable with > moving this ahead as a cross-community effort. > > My own personal view is that the letter as drafted could be > misconstrued as a call for cross-community work. I am not saying whether > this is a good or bad thing, but as there has been considerable debate > on this over the past few months, I would not feel comfortable in > sending such a letter in my capacity as Chair unless I know the Council > supports that move. > > So may I ask for comments on the proposed letter? Is everyone OK with > me sending it as-is? > > Thanks. > > Stéphane > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Le 31 juil. 2011 à 00:15, Rosemary Sinclair a écrit : > > > Hi Stephane > > > > I wonder if you would review this letter for GAC and ccNSO if you are > happy to send it as GNSO Council Chair > > > > The topic of extended participation in our discussions came up at our > audio-conference on Wednesday > > > > The group appreciates that the Motion still has to be approved by > Council but there is interest in the work continuing on an informal > basis in the meantime > > > > but a strong view that the concepts are complicated and inter-related > > > > > so the more diverse views the better, the earlier the better..... > > > > the letter will need Glen's attention to ensure ICANN protocols and > details are correct - I am completely out of my depth on all that!!!! > > > > cheers > > > > Rosemary > > ________________________________________ > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org] On > Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry [Glen(a)icann.org] > > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 8:32 AM > > To: council(a)gnso.icann.org > > Subject: [council] Draft Council meeting minutes 21 July 2011. > > > > Dear Councillors, > > > > Attached please find the draft minutes of the Council meeting held on > 21 July 2011. > > > > If there are no comments, these minutes will be published on the > website as approved on 8 August 2011. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Kind regards, > > Glen > > > > > > Glen de Saint Géry > > GNSO Secretariat > > > gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> > > http://gnso.icann.org > > > > > > <Request to GAC:ccNSO.docx> > >

3 2