Ayden, maybe I can already clarify before the call? As the GNSO Operating Procedures foresee these minimum timeframes and the request would be coming from the community, approval is presumed. The approval process was mainly put in place to deal with requests that are not community or contract driven to make sure that only in exceptional circumstances less than 40 days is provided for public comment. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 at 01:59 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: "Selli, Claudia" <cs574w@intl.att.com>, "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org>, Joan Kerr <joankerr@fbsc.org>, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino@gmail.com>, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org>, "joan@npoc.org" <joan@npoc.org>, Graeme Bunton <gbunton@tucows.com>, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [council] Fwd: RDS message for circulation On this call, can we please have some clarification over this piece of the table on page 8: "Minimum timeframe for public comment is 30 days. This would require the approval of two ICANN executives as the standard public comment period duration is 40 days." Who would be these two ICANN executives, and what factors would they consider when making this decision? And is there a decision really being asked of them to make, or is its approval presumed, because the proposed timeline itself is reliant on this shortened, 30-day comment period? Thank you, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 15 May 2018 12:16 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, SG/C Chairs, On behalf of Council leadership, I would like to invite you to an informational webinar to discuss possible next steps in preparation for a possible adoption of a temporary policy / specification by the ICANN Board in relation to the interim model for GDPR Compliance. This webinar will be scheduled on Monday 21 May at 21.00 UTC. The adoption of a temporary policy by the ICANN Board contemplates a Policy Development Process (PDP) which would need to be completed within the one-year timeline following adoption of the temporary policy. To ensure readiness of the GNSO Council in its role as manager of the PDP, Council leadership has documented possible next steps and related questions for your consideration (see attached document). These questions are purely focused on the process aspect of a possible expedited policy development process, as the substance will be dealt with at a subsequent stage. We are aware that there may be disagreement with regards to the approach ICANN Org and/or the ICANN Board are taking, but this is not the subject of our conversation, or the Council’s responsibility at this stage. What the Council will be responsible for is creating the optimal circumstances to allow this (E)PDP to succeed. As you can see from the draft timeline, time is of the essence. As such, it is of key importance that we work collaboratively and diligently, taking responsibility for and ownership of this important task. We hope we can all count on your support and commitment. Rafik, Donna and I hope that as a result of this meeting Council members will be prepared to confirm a direction and next steps at our May GNSO Council meeting, which is scheduled for later that week. Call details will be circulated by the GNSO Secretariat shortly. Best wishes, Heather Forrest GNSO Chair