April 2013 - council - lists.icann.org

None
by Jonathan Robinson April 7, 2013

April 7, 2013

All, Thank-you for a very constructive set of sessions and particularly for your contributions to the more open first and last sessions of the day. Very rewarding. I have taken Mason's notes and put them into a structure I can use within the session tomorrow. We have an opportunity to talk through and refine this tomorrow ahead of meeting with the board. I have also sent a note to Steve Crocker letting him know where we propose to go with the session. See you all then. Jonathan

3 2

Re: [council] A note to Fadi on the integrity of the policy development process
by Jonathan Robinson April 7, 2013

April 7, 2013

Thanks John, Although it would be timely to get something out ahead of meeting with Fadi, waiting 24 hrs should do no harm. I'd like to hear some other indications of support (or not) if possible. Jonathan john(a)crediblecontext.com wrote: >All, > > >In our conversations today triggered by the report on the Expert Working Group and the motion on the strawman, there was concern about the rise of policy development process work-arounds. > > >In an attempt to make the point to Fadi (and, by extension, the Board) by, as the song goes, accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative, I have drafted this short note that Jonathan might send this evening. > > >Give it a look and let me know. > > >Cheers, > > >Berard > > >DRAFT/letter to Fadi RE: directory data collection PDP > >Fadi, > >Because of the role played by the GNSO Council in managing the policy development process, we have been paying very close attention to the work of the expert working group on collecting and maintaining registration data. > >We were, in fact, given a status report by staff today at our working session. This will help us in our work on the PDP requested by the Board. In light of the legacy of WhoIs and the launch of new gTLDs, there are few issues of greater importance to ICANN. > >It is our hope that the expert working group's findings will crystallize in the near-term and, once transmitted to the Council, lead to quick action on that PDP. > >Our commitment is to move quickly, thereby reinforcing the method and value of the policy development process and limiting the likelihood that any single idea from the expert working group will get out ahead of the Council’s consideration. > >Jonathan >

3 2

Fwd: Material for the BGRI-WG meeting on Sun. Apr. 7th from 11:00 - 12:30 at Grand Hall B (GAC room) ..
by Jonathan Robinson April 6, 2013

April 6, 2013

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Fwd: Material for the BGRI-WG meeting on Sun. Apr. 7th from 11:00 - 12:30 at Grand Hall B (GAC room) .. From: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson(a)afilias.info> To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson(a)afilias.info> CC: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Material for the BGRI-WG meeting on Sun. Apr. 7th from 11:00 - 12:30 at Grand Hall B (GAC room) .. From: Manal Ismail <manal(a)tra.gov.eg> To: bgri-wg(a)icann.org CC: jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com,<david.olive(a)icann.org>,<jamie.hedlund(a)icann.org>,<Samantha.Eisner(a)icann.org> Dear All .. In preparation for our BGRI-WG meeting on Sun. Apr. 7th from 11:00 – 12:30 at Grand Hall B (GAC room), please find attached the meeting agenda, as well as material referenced in the agenda .. Due to the tight agenda, some material, such as slides on Implementation of ATRT1 GAC –related Recommendations, is circulated to serve as background material but will not be presented at the meeting .. Yet Bill and myself will be more than happy to answer any questions you may have .. Apologies for the late circulation but almost all attachments has been circulated individually before .. Looking forward to a fruitful discussion and a productive meeting .. Kind Regards --Manal

1 0

A note to Fadi on the integrity of the policy development process
by john＠crediblecontext.com April 6, 2013

April 6, 2013

All, In our conversations today triggered by the report on the Expert Working Group and the motion on the strawman, there was concern about the rise of policy development process work-arounds. In an attempt to make the point to Fadi (and, by extension, the Board) by, as the song goes, accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative, I have drafted this short note that Jonathan might send this evening. Give it a look and let me know. Cheers, Berard DRAFT/letter to Fadi RE: directory data collection PDP Fadi, Because of the role played by the GNSO Council in managing the policy development process, we have been paying very close attention to the work of the expert working group on collecting and maintaining registration data. We were, in fact, given a status report by staff today at our working session. This will help us in our work on the PDP requested by the Board. In light of the legacy of WhoIs and the launch of new gTLDs, there are few issues of greater importance to ICANN. It is our hope that the expert working group's findings will crystallize in the near-term and, once transmitted to the Council, lead to quick action on that PDP. Our commitment is to move quickly, thereby reinforcing the method and value of the policy development process and limiting the likelihood that any single idea from the expert working group will get out ahead of the Council’s consideration. Jonathan

3 2

FW: Notes for tomorrow's meetings
by Marika Konings April 6, 2013

April 6, 2013

On 06/04/13 17:43, "Mason Cole" <mcole(a)5x5com.com> wrote: >Meeting with Fadi: > >- His ongoing confidence in new gTLD execution >- IDN variants >- Specificity in roll-out timeline > > > >GAC >- Understands/supports multistakeholder model. Doesn't necessarily do >well inside that model. Need to be creative about how we engage them. >- Would be useful to understand what GAC issues are. Would be helpful to >provide them with forward look on council activity so they're alerted in >advance and can plan. >- Get direct input from GAC on issues they're interested in. >- Perhaps assign ICANN staff person as liaison between GAC-GNSO. >- Maybe provide GAC with instruction on opportunities and windows for >input. Mistake to involve them in WGs. >- Make GAC a resource. WGs should try to identify issues that may be of >interest to the GAC and give them a chance to contribute. >- Realize that governments are meeting and talking to other governments. >Their interest is showing capitals they are effective over ICANN. Flaw >in ICANN structure. Going to have to hit them over the head with >realities of interaction problems. >- Issue of full council's relationship with GAC vs. individual members' >various relationships. >- Establish mutual GNSO-GAC liaisons; one from each house. > >Board and CEO >- Have free-flow session without a giant agenda. Themes vs. individual >issues. >- Role and function of GNSO council in multi-stakeholder model (e.g., >board approaches council for policy advice, timelines too short... = >ignoring process) >- Intentional bypassing of bottom-up process >- Policy input vs. policy advice >- Emerging trends we want to reflect to the board >- Council restructure called for the board to accept broader public >comment from those impacted by policy; most input the board receives is >from finite population of the GNSO. >- Public interest at ICANN >- Engagement and outreach, new constituencies > > > >Sent from my iPad

1 0

FW: Expert Working Group on gTLD Registration Data
by Neuman, Jeff April 6, 2013

April 6, 2013

All, Here is the document Michele was referring to on questions for the Monday session. Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs -----Original Message----- From: Michele Neylon :: Blacknight [mailto:michele@blacknight.com] Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 11:36 AM To: Neuman, Jeff Subject: ewg doc https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/41877786/Next+Generation+g… -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://mneylon.tel/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

1 0

RE: [council] Proposed Motion on RAA
by Winterfeldt, Brian April 5, 2013

April 5, 2013

Dear all: The IPC also opposes this untimely motion. We will follow up in due course with additional details on the IPC's position. Thank you, Brian Brian J. Winterfeldt Partner bwinterfeldt(a)steptoe.com<mailto:bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com> Steptoe ------------------------------------------- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Thomas Rickert[SMTP:RICKERT@ANWAELTE.DE] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 5:41:33 AM To: Jonathan Robinson Cc: Wendy Seltzer; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Proposed Motion on RAA Auto forwarded by a Rule I am happy to second the motion! Thomas ============= thomas-rickert.tel +49.228.74.898.0 Am 03.04.2013 um 13:27 schrieb "Jonathan Robinson" <jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com<mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com>>: > > Thanks Wendy, > > Technically, this just missed the deadline but personally I have no > objections on this basis. > Providing no objections are received, I suggest we proceed as though > it did not miss the deadline. > > Do we have a second for this motion? > > Jonathan > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Wendy Seltzer > Sent: 03 April 2013 01:28 > To: Council GNSO > Subject: [council] Proposed Motion on RAA > > > I'd like to propose the following motion for the Beijing meeting > (resending from the correct address): > > Whereas the most recently posted draft Registrar Accreditation > Agreement > (RAA) has raised serious concerns of policy among most of the > stakeholder groups in the GNSO [see Minutes of March call]; > > Whereas ICANN negotiators have held it out as a blocker to the > implementation of the New gTLD Program; > > Resolved, Council recommends that ICANN permit Registrars to extend > the rights and obligations in the current RAA and its renewals to new > gTLDs until such time as the GNSO adopts a consensus supporting the > policy changes in any proposed new RAA. > > Thanks, > --Wendy > > -- > Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org<mailto:wendy@seltzer.org> +1 617.863.0613 Policy Counsel, > World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & > Society at Harvard University Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School > Information Society Project http://wendy.seltzer.org/ > https://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/ > http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ >

1 0

Weekend Sessions
by Jonathan Robinson April 5, 2013

April 5, 2013

Hello All, Trust you have travelled well and look forward to working with you over the weekend. See you tomorrow at 09h00. Jonathan

1 0

Preliminary report for meeting of the new gTLD committee on 26 March 2013
by Bruce Tonkin April 5, 2013

April 5, 2013

Hello All, Further to the posting of the resolution regarding the contract with IBM for the trademark clearinghouse, ICANN has now published a preliminary report for the meeting held on 26 March 2013. From: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/prelim-report-new-gtld-26mar… 1. Approval to Enter Agreement with IBM for Trademark Clearinghouse Due to a potential for conflict of interest, Thomas Narten was not present for the deliberation of this item. The Committee received an update on the development of the Trademark Clearinghouse as it has been divided into two functions, one to be performed by Deloitte and the other by IBM, which will perform the sunrise and claims work. The Committee also received some detail on the negotiated costs for the IBM work. Staff confirmed that an RFP had been issued prior to the selection of the Trademark Clearinghouse providers. The Committee then took the following action: Whereas, ICANN and IBM have negotiated in good faith the terms for a proposed statement of work for operation of the Sunrise and Trademark Claims services offered by the Trademark Clearinghouse. Whereas, the New gTLD Program Committee has reviewed the terms of the proposed Statement of Work for ICANN. Whereas, approval is required to commit ICANN funds in the amount of USD 4 million. Whereas, execution of the agreement enables continuation of the technical build out to support these services for the New gTLD Program. Resolved (2013.03.26.NG01), the New gTLD Program Committee authorizes the President and CEO to enter into the proposed agreement with IBM. Ten members of the Committee voted in favor of the Resolution. Two members of the Committee were unavailable to vote. The resolution carried. 2. Protections for Names of IGOs The Committee received an update on the status of work regarding the establishment of protections of names of IGOs within the first round of the New gTLD Program, including a brief discussion of the advice from the GAC, issues relating to the protection of common acronyms that are also acronyms of IGOs, and the creation of a ongoing mechanisms that may need to be put in place to address the GAC advice. The Committee agreed that further briefing was necessary, and that it would have a broader discussion of this issue at its meeting during ICANN's Beijing meeting. 3. "Closed" Generics The Committee briefly discussed the issue of "closed" generics and received an update on the work that was requested from staff on this issue, as well as the results of the public comment forum. The Committee agreed that further discussion on this topic would be necessary at its meeting during ICANN's Beijing meeting. The Committee also requested that this topic be on the agenda for the Public Forum in Beijing. 4. Update on Registrar Accreditation Agreement Negotiations and the Registry Agreement The Committee received an update on the status of the RAA negotiations as well as the status of the Registry Agreement after ICANN posted a version for public comment on 5 February 2013. The President and CEO provided a brief summary of the public comments on the Registry Agreement. The Committee also briefly discussed the Board-approved amendment process as well as proposed changes to that process to respond to community concern. 5. Any Other Business The Committee received a brief update from the President and CEO on the work towards a DNS summit in New York City on 23 April 2013, where the work of taskforces arising out of the CEO Roundtables will be progressed, and, if available and appropriate, a signing ceremony will take place regarding the new Registrant Rights and Responsibilities document within the RAA. The Committee also received a brief update on the status of the Public Interest Commitments documents that were submitted by applicants.

1 0

Updated proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Public Meeting in Beijing 10 April 2013
by Glen de Saint Géry April 5, 2013

April 5, 2013

Dear Councillors, Please find the updated proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Public Meeting in Beijing 10 April 2013 at 15:15 local time (07:15 UTC). https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+10+April+2013 http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-10apr13-en.htm This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and updated. http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-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 Times 07:15 UTC<http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> http://tinyurl.com/cu3adns Coordinated Universal Time 07:15 UTC 00:15 Los Angeles; 03:15 Washington; 08:15 London; 09:15 Paris; 19:15 Wellington 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. 15:15 - 18:30 Council Public Forum Presentations by Stakeholder Groups and Constituency Leaders (50 minutes) * Registries Stakeholder Group - Keith Drazek * Registrars Stakeholder Group - Matt Serlin * Non Commercial Stakeholder Group - Robin Gross * Not-for-Profit Operational Concerns Constituency - Alain Berranger * Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) - Bill Drake * Commercial and Business Users Constituency (BC) - Elisa Cooper * Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC) - Kristina Rosette * Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers (ISPCP) - Tony Holmes Break (10 minutes) Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes) 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Statement of interest updates 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Draft Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting 14 March 2013 approved on 30 March 2013. http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-14mar13-en.htm 1.5. GNSO Projects List http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf * Review main changes. * Comments and/or questions. Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (10 minutes) Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics Include brief review of Projects List<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> Item 3: Consent agenda ([0] minutes) TBC. Item 4: MOTION - Initiation of a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information (10 minutes) A Final Issue Report translation and transliteration of contact information was submitted to the GNSO Council on 21 March 2013 (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/library) The Final Issue Report recommends that the GNSO Council should initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP) limited to the issues discussed in this report but delay the next steps in the PDP until the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services completes its recommendations, in May 2013 with a possible extension, in order to ensure that the resulting policy recommendations would be consistent with any new model or approaches to contact data that may result from the Expert Working Group's deliberations; As recommended by the WHOIS Policy Review Team the Final Issue Report also recommends that ICANN should commission a study on the commercial feasibility of translation or transliteration systems for internationalized contact data, which is expected to help inform the PDP Working Group in its deliberations; ICANN's General Counsel has confirmed that the topic is properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and within the scope of the GNSO. Link to motion https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+April+20… 4.1 Reading of the motion (). 4.2 Discussion of motion. 4.3 Vote. Item 5: MOTION - The Trademark Clearing House "Strawman Solution" (10 minutes) Link to motion https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+April+20… 5.1 Reading of the motion (Maria Farrell). 5.2 Discussion of motion. 5.3 Vote. Item 6: MOTION - Policy Concerns Regarding the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (10 minutes) Link to motion https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+April+20… 6.1 Reading of the motion (Wendy Seltzer). 6.2 Discussion of motion. 6.3 Vote. Item 7: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Preliminary Issue Report on Uniformity of Reporting (20 minutes) At its October meeting last year the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on the current state of uniformity in the mechanisms to initiate, track, and analyse policy-violation reports. ICANN Staff is also explicitly requested to provide its recommendation(s) on how this issue can be further addressed outside of a PDP if recommendations in relation to this issue do not require consensus policies to implement. This Report is designated as "preliminary" to allow for community input and dialogue prior to the publication of the Final Issue Report. The Preliminary Issue Report will be updated to reflect community feedback submitted through this forum. A Final Issue Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/uofr-final-31mar13-en.pdf> will then be presented to the GNSO Council for its consideration. 7.1 Presentation of the Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/uofr-final-31mar13-en.pdf> (Marika Konings). 7.2 Discussion of the Report and next steps. Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Policy vs. Implementation (15 minutes) Recent issues highlight an ongoing broader issue regarding the boundary between policy development and implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy development and integration work from the outset. In addition, the Council is increasingly asked to consider issues for policy guidance and may well need to look at the evolution of its own work and processes to accommodate this type of request. ICANN Staff published a paper<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation-framework-08j…> intended to facilitate further community discussions on this topic. Discussions on the Council mailing list and at subsequent meetings indicate that this is an area of fundamental interest to the Council. Following further community discussion in Beijing the Council is to discuss the current position and to consider next steps from a GNSO Council perspective. 8.1 Discussion 8.2 Next steps Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Template to request an Issues Report (10 minutes) One outcome from the Operations and Organisation meeting that GNSO Council Leadership held with ICANN staff in Amsterdam earlier this year, was to develop an online template to complete the request for an Issue Report. The objective of this tool is to encourage requestors to gather as much information as possible and engage in early discussions with others prior to submitting a request for an Issue Report. The intended outcome is that by encouraging completion of all the information requested in the template, it will be possible to identify what information may still be needed and encourage collaboration between different interested parties at an early stage. The template (https://community.icann.org/x/GQllAg) can be completed by either by following the instructions or by downloading the word template from the same page. Once completed, Council members will be able to either create a PDF and submit that together with a motion to the Council mailing list, or insert the relevant wiki link in the motion. Please note that this template is tailored to requests for Issue Reports as defined in the PDP Manual. The template is still in draft form and the Council is to discuss its usefulness, consider accepting it for future issue reports and consider also where similar templates could be used elsewhere. 9.1 - Discussion 9.2 - Next steps Item 10: Any Other Business (5 minutes) Item 11: Open Microphone 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: a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House. b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A<http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA>): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority. d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority. f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House. g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination. h. 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. i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority, j. 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. k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote. l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority of the other House." Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4<http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf>) 4.4.1 Applicability Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures. a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); b. Approve a PDP recommendation; c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a Council position open for election. 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. 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 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available. 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (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) UTC 07:15 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-8+1DST 00:15 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+1DST 03:15 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 04:15 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+1DST 04:15 Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 08:15 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 08:15 Abuja, Nigeria (WAT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html>) UTC+1+0DST 08:15 Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 09:15 Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 09:15 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+2+0DST 10:15 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> ) UTC+5+0DST 12:15 Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 15:15 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+0DST 15:15 Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html> ) UTC+12+1DST 19:15 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com http://tinyurl.com/cu3adns Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0