GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts
Dear Councilors, I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026. Motion: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member. Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq3pg/edit?usp=sharing> The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process. Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451. As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement. ----- [Image] [Image] Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> [Image] [Image] …collaboration to enhance communication. [Image] https://www.microboss.org<https://www.microboss.org/> | [Image]<https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech> [Image]<https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en> [Image]<https://www.youtube.com/@microboss> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email.
Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following: 1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion? 2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT? I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026.
*Motion: *
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu...>
On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member.
*Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form:*
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...>
The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process.
*Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS *
The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451.
As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement.
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi there We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process? Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following:
1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion?
2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT?
I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026.
*Motion: *
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu...>
On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member.
*Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form:*
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...>
The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process.
*Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS *
The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451.
As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement.
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Farzaneh, There may be some urgency for the SPIRT to consider the RSP issue since it relates to ICANN's process for RSP qualification and applicants are currently identifying qualified RSPs. After reviewing the May 7 SPIRT meeting, I agree it's appropriate for Council to authorize the SPIRT to look into this issue. I don't actually think we need to approve a 72 hour consent by non-objection process in order to do this but that is how the Motion has been framed so that is why I asked the questions below. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 7:17 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there
We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process?
Farzaneh
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following:
1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion?
2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT?
I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026.
*Motion: *
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu...>
On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member.
*Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form:*
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...>
The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process.
*Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS *
The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451.
As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement.
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Anne In order to do this we need a process. I raised my concerns with the process Lawrence provided. We should address those concerns, approve the process then attend to the matter that they want to bring. At the moment, we don’t have a process to authorize them. Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 11:33 AM Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Farzaneh, There may be some urgency for the SPIRT to consider the RSP issue since it relates to ICANN's process for RSP qualification and applicants are currently identifying qualified RSPs. After reviewing the May 7 SPIRT meeting, I agree it's appropriate for Council to authorize the SPIRT to look into this issue. I don't actually think we need to approve a 72 hour consent by non-objection process in order to do this but that is how the Motion has been framed so that is why I asked the questions below. Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 7:17 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there
We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process?
Farzaneh
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following:
1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion?
2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT?
I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026.
*Motion: *
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu...>
On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member.
*Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form:*
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...>
The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process.
*Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS *
The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451.
As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement.
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Farzaneh, Do kindly highlight area(s) of the process you are not aligned with and the rationale so an attempt may be made to resolve them or provide clarity where needed. Thank you. LOR ----- [Image] [Image] Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> [Image] [Image] …collaboration to enhance communication. [Image] https://www.microboss.org<https://www.microboss.org/> | [Image]<https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech> [Image]<https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en> [Image]<https://www.youtube.com/@microboss> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. ________________________________ From: farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2026 4:59:23 PM To: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> Cc: Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts <lawrence@microboss.org>; GNSO council <council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Re: GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts Hi Anne In order to do this we need a process. I raised my concerns with the process Lawrence provided. We should address those concerns, approve the process then attend to the matter that they want to bring. At the moment, we don’t have a process to authorize them. Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 11:33 AM Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Farzaneh, There may be some urgency for the SPIRT to consider the RSP issue since it relates to ICANN's process for RSP qualification and applicants are currently identifying qualified RSPs. After reviewing the May 7 SPIRT meeting, I agree it's appropriate for Council to authorize the SPIRT to look into this issue. I don't actually think we need to approve a 72 hour consent by non-objection process in order to do this but that is how the Motion has been framed so that is why I asked the questions below. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 7:17 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com<mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi there We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process? Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org>> wrote: Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following: 1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion? 2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT? I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council <council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026. Motion: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member. Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq3pg/edit?usp=sharing> The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process. Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451. As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement. ----- [Image] [Image] Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> [Image] [Image] …collaboration to enhance communication. [Image] https://www.microboss.org<https://www.microboss.org/> | [Image]<https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech> [Image]<https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en> [Image]<https://www.youtube.com/@microboss> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org<mailto:council-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org<mailto:council-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Lawrence I have to consult with others and will provide feedback to facilitate your work. I don’t think this is a leadership only decision( in fact no issue should be just leadership decision) I can’t access the document you shared is it me or should the document permission be tweaked? (I will provide more feedback as soon as I can) but I think all the issues should be approved with a vote. And I am sure the council has voting threshold procedures in place so that not a single stakeholder can block things. Also the 72 hour timeline is pretty arbitrary. The council can’t be turned into rubber stamping issues. SPiRT can flag the time sensitive nature of the issue and the leadership can make sure that a timely decision is made by the council. And the timeliness of the decision also depends a lot on the council having the necessary information. Because not all members can listen to the recording. I would have liked this to be more of a collaboration between the council and SPiRT so that SPiRT doesn’t refer issues to itself but if that’s not possible, all the changes SPiRT wants to do should be approved by the council. Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 6:31 PM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts < lawrence@microboss.org> wrote:
Dear Farzaneh,
Do kindly highlight area(s) of the process you are not aligned with and the rationale so an attempt may be made to resolve them or provide clarity where needed.
Thank you.
LOR
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. ------------------------------ *From:* farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> *Sent:* Saturday, May 9, 2026 4:59:23 PM *To:* Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com>
*Cc:* Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts <lawrence@microboss.org>; GNSO council < council@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [council] Re: GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts
Hi Anne
In order to do this we need a process. I raised my concerns with the process Lawrence provided. We should address those concerns, approve the process then attend to the matter that they want to bring. At the moment, we don’t have a process to authorize them.
Farzaneh
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 11:33 AM Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Farzaneh, There may be some urgency for the SPIRT to consider the RSP issue since it relates to ICANN's process for RSP qualification and applicants are currently identifying qualified RSPs. After reviewing the May 7 SPIRT meeting, I agree it's appropriate for Council to authorize the SPIRT to look into this issue. I don't actually think we need to approve a 72 hour consent by non-objection process in order to do this but that is how the Motion has been framed so that is why I asked the questions below. Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 7:17 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there
We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process?
Farzaneh
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following:
1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion?
2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT?
I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026.
*Motion: *
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu...>
On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member.
*Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form:*
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...>
The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process.
*Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS *
The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451.
As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement.
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Well I hope we can do so at this May meeting and that is why I asked the two questions below about the "no objection after 72 hours consent process". If Council does not agree to that process, then I don't know what would bar the Council from approving referring an issue to the SPIRT for consultation purposes on a case-by-case basis? I think Council can certainly do that right now as the supervisor of the SPIRT under its Charter. Agree the process should be clarified but if Council does not approve it at the May meeting (as may be modified by friendly amendment), then I think that under our Operating Procedures, there can still be an email vote on a Motion to send the RSP issue to the SPIRT for further deliberation. We would not want to hold this one up based on the fact that Council has not approved a process for allowing the SPIRIT to have issues referred to it by Council. The reason is that this directly affects RSP approval processes ongoing right now at ICANN. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 8:59 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Anne
In order to do this we need a process. I raised my concerns with the process Lawrence provided. We should address those concerns, approve the process then attend to the matter that they want to bring. At the moment, we don’t have a process to authorize them.
Farzaneh
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 11:33 AM Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Farzaneh, There may be some urgency for the SPIRT to consider the RSP issue since it relates to ICANN's process for RSP qualification and applicants are currently identifying qualified RSPs. After reviewing the May 7 SPIRT meeting, I agree it's appropriate for Council to authorize the SPIRT to look into this issue. I don't actually think we need to approve a 72 hour consent by non-objection process in order to do this but that is how the Motion has been framed so that is why I asked the questions below. Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 7:17 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there
We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process?
Farzaneh
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following:
1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion?
2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT?
I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026.
*Motion: *
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu...>
On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member.
*Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form:*
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...>
The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process.
*Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS *
The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451.
As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement.
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
The proposal on the process for SPIRT Issue for Council Consideration can be found here<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_Rj5Z87ljyqajA5VliMSPvPb77AH...>. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_Rj5Z87ljyqajA5VliMSPvPb77AH... document shared prior to the last council meeting has been updated with clear flowcharts that describe how the different stakeholders engaged in apply the Predictability Framework carry out their roles. As to the Council path, the first option which is the standard processis how the GNSO Council currently conducts its business, so adapting this for the SPIRT should be a breeze and there shouldn’t be any issue with this track. The expedited process to be used in bringing alerts on SPIRT issues before Council is a fast-track means to securing Council's approval to meet up with real-time timelines and dead lines as the SPIRT works to resolve issues emernating from a live ongoing program. Should more comfort be provided, the Councils adoption process can be modified to issuing ballots for members voting within the 72 hour Conscent period. LOR ----- [Image] [Image] Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> [Image] [Image] …collaboration to enhance communication. [Image] https://www.microboss.org<https://www.microboss.org/> | [Image]<https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech> [Image]<https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en> [Image]<https://www.youtube.com/@microboss> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. ________________________________ From: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2026 8:08:38 PM To: farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> Cc: Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts <lawrence@microboss.org>; GNSO council <council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Re: GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts Well I hope we can do so at this May meeting and that is why I asked the two questions below about the "no objection after 72 hours consent process". If Council does not agree to that process, then I don't know what would bar the Council from approving referring an issue to the SPIRT for consultation purposes on a case-by-case basis? I think Council can certainly do that right now as the supervisor of the SPIRT under its Charter. Agree the process should be clarified but if Council does not approve it at the May meeting (as may be modified by friendly amendment), then I think that under our Operating Procedures, there can still be an email vote on a Motion to send the RSP issue to the SPIRT for further deliberation. We would not want to hold this one up based on the fact that Council has not approved a process for allowing the SPIRIT to have issues referred to it by Council. The reason is that this directly affects RSP approval processes ongoing right now at ICANN. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 8:59 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com<mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Anne In order to do this we need a process. I raised my concerns with the process Lawrence provided. We should address those concerns, approve the process then attend to the matter that they want to bring. At the moment, we don’t have a process to authorize them. Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 11:33 AM Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Farzaneh, There may be some urgency for the SPIRT to consider the RSP issue since it relates to ICANN's process for RSP qualification and applicants are currently identifying qualified RSPs. After reviewing the May 7 SPIRT meeting, I agree it's appropriate for Council to authorize the SPIRT to look into this issue. I don't actually think we need to approve a 72 hour consent by non-objection process in order to do this but that is how the Motion has been framed so that is why I asked the questions below. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 7:17 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com<mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi there We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process? Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org>> wrote: Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following: 1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion? 2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT? I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council <council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026. Motion: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member. Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq3pg/edit?usp=sharing> The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process. Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451. As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement. ----- [Image] [Image] Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> [Image] [Image] …collaboration to enhance communication. [Image] https://www.microboss.org<https://www.microboss.org/> | [Image]<https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech> [Image]<https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en> [Image]<https://www.youtube.com/@microboss> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org<mailto:council-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org<mailto:council-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Anne and Farzaneh, Apologies for the inconvenience. Please find linked below an updated link of the SPIRT Issue Alert Process previously mentioned by Lawrence. SPIRT Issue Alert Process: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_Rj5Z87ljyqajA5VliMSPvPb77AH... Sincerely, Andrew -- Andrew Chen Policy Development Support Sr. Specialist, Policy Development Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) https://www.icann.org/ From: "Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council" <council@icann.org> Reply-To: "lawrence@microboss.org" <lawrence@microboss.org> Date: Saturday, May 9, 2026 at 2:42 PM To: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com>, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO council <council@icann.org> Subject: [council] Re: GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts The proposal on the process for SPIRT Issue for Council Consideration can be found here [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_...>. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_Rj5Z87ljyqajA5VliMSPvPb77AH... [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_Rj5Z87ljyqajA5VliMSPvPb77AH...__;!!PtGJab4!-EgHB7XjqEgiee8Dj-YxSMJp9erJ0toQyllNVhacEo_QBffimFL8ZDOtqlVYNsitUW8nPY51HniLSbu2JUbeTB0$>The document shared prior to the last council meeting has been updated with clear flowcharts that describe how the different stakeholders engaged in apply the Predictability Framework carry out their roles. As to the Council path, the first option which is the standard processis how the GNSO Council currently conducts its business, so adapting this for the SPIRT should be a breeze and there shouldn’t be any issue with this track. The expedited process to be used in bringing alerts on SPIRT issues before Council is a fast-track means to securing Council's approval to meet up with real-time timelines and dead lines as the SPIRT works to resolve issues emernating from a live ongoing program. Should more comfort be provided, the Councils adoption process can be modified to issuing ballots for members voting within the 72 hour Conscent period. LOR ----- [Image] [Image] Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> [Image] [Image] …collaboration to enhance communication. [Image] https://www.microboss.org [microboss.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.microboss.org/__;!!PtGJab4!-EgHB7XjqE...> | [Image][facebook.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/microbosstech/__;!!PtGJa...> [Image][linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/__...> [Image][mobile.twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech__;!!PtGJ...> [Image][instagram.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en__;...> [Image][youtube.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/@microboss__;!!PtGJab4!-E...> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. ________________________________ From: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2026 8:08:38 PM To: farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> Cc: Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts <lawrence@microboss.org>; GNSO council <council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Re: GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts Well I hope we can do so at this May meeting and that is why I asked the two questions below about the "no objection after 72 hours consent process". If Council does not agree to that process, then I don't know what would bar the Council from approving referring an issue to the SPIRT for consultation purposes on a case-by-case basis? I think Council can certainly do that right now as the supervisor of the SPIRT under its Charter. Agree the process should be clarified but if Council does not approve it at the May meeting (as may be modified by friendly amendment), then I think that under our Operating Procedures, there can still be an email vote on a Motion to send the RSP issue to the SPIRT for further deliberation. We would not want to hold this one up based on the fact that Council has not approved a process for allowing the SPIRIT to have issues referred to it by Council. The reason is that this directly affects RSP approval processes ongoing right now at ICANN. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 8:59 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com<mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Anne In order to do this we need a process. I raised my concerns with the process Lawrence provided. We should address those concerns, approve the process then attend to the matter that they want to bring. At the moment, we don’t have a process to authorize them. Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 11:33 AM Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Farzaneh, There may be some urgency for the SPIRT to consider the RSP issue since it relates to ICANN's process for RSP qualification and applicants are currently identifying qualified RSPs. After reviewing the May 7 SPIRT meeting, I agree it's appropriate for Council to authorize the SPIRT to look into this issue. I don't actually think we need to approve a 72 hour consent by non-objection process in order to do this but that is how the Motion has been framed so that is why I asked the questions below. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 7:17 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com<mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi there We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process? Farzaneh On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org>> wrote: Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following: 1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion? 2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT? I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council <council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026. Motion: · https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmh...> On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member. Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIk...> The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process. Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451. As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement. ----- Error! Filename not specified. Error! Filename not specified. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> Error! Filename not specified. Error! Filename not specified. …collaboration to enhance communication. Error! Filename not specified. https://www.microboss.org [microboss.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.microboss.org/__;!!PtGJab4!-EgHB7XjqE...> | Error! Filename not specified.[facebook.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/microbosstech/__;!!PtGJa...> Error! Filename not specified.[linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/__...> Error! Filename not specified.[mobile.twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech__;!!PtGJ...> Error! Filename not specified.[instagram.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en__;...> Error! Filename not specified.[youtube.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/@microboss__;!!PtGJab4!-E...> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org<mailto:council-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org<mailto:council-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thanks Andrew. How about we approach this in a more collaborative Council–SPIRT way rather than through an expedited/authorization pathway. The Council is ultimately responsible for managing the policy and implementation process, including maintaining the boundary between implementation and policy. Instead of relying on a separated process, we could establish a Council–SPIRT coordination group that can be alerted when issues arise. For example, when a stakeholder/individual brings up an issue, the group could discuss the issue with SPIRT and staff, identify whether there are broader governance, contractual, technical, interoperability, or policy implications, and then debrief the Council. The Council could then determine whether SPIRT-Council should proceed with further deliberations with staff and org, involving the Council coordination group throughout the process. Once that work is completed, the outcome could come back to the Council for review and a formal decision. (obviously if it's a policy issue it is not in the hands of the council to decide on and the council should not send it back to SPIRT) I think the recent EPP issue demonstrates why this additional coordination layer may be useful. While framed as an operational alignment matter, it also could potentially raise broader questions relating to technical standardization, registrar obligations, interoperability, and the role of IETF/IANA review processes. Under the currently proposed expedited pathway, the Council does not have the opportunity to even know about the broader implications. The issue request itself also already contains a proposed solution, even though at this stage the process is only about authorizing a discussion. A coordination model like this would preserve SPIRT’s important implementation and predictability functions while ensuring the Council remains actively engaged in its process-management and oversight role throughout the lifecycle of an issue. The coordination group can act very fast but in my opinion it's essential for a collaborative approach. Farzaneh On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 12:55 PM Andrew Chen <andrew.chen@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Anne and Farzaneh,
Apologies for the inconvenience. Please find linked below an updated link of the SPIRT Issue Alert Process previously mentioned by Lawrence.
SPIRT Issue Alert Process: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_Rj5Z87ljyqajA5VliMSPvPb77AH...
Sincerely,
Andrew
--
Andrew Chen
Policy Development Support Sr. Specialist, Policy Development Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
*From: *"Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council" <council@icann.org> *Reply-To: *"lawrence@microboss.org" <lawrence@microboss.org> *Date: *Saturday, May 9, 2026 at 2:42 PM *To: *Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com>, farzaneh badii < farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> *Cc: *GNSO council <council@icann.org> *Subject: *[council] Re: GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts
The proposal on the process for SPIRT Issue for Council Consideration can be found here [docs.google.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_...> . https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_Rj5Z87ljyqajA5VliMSPvPb77AH... [docs.google.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1zITIUCB5yvjV_Rj5Z87ljyqajA5VliMSPvPb77AH...__;!!PtGJab4!-EgHB7XjqEgiee8Dj-YxSMJp9erJ0toQyllNVhacEo_QBffimFL8ZDOtqlVYNsitUW8nPY51HniLSbu2JUbeTB0$>The document shared prior to the last council meeting has been updated with clear flowcharts that describe how the different stakeholders engaged in apply the Predictability Framework carry out their roles.
As to the Council path, the first option which is the *standard process*is how the GNSO Council currently conducts its business, so adapting this for the SPIRT should be a breeze and there shouldn’t be any issue with this track.
The expedited process to be used in bringing alerts on SPIRT issues before Council is a fast-track means to securing Council's approval to meet up with real-time timelines and dead lines as the SPIRT works to resolve issues emernating from a live ongoing program. Should more comfort be provided, the Councils adoption process can be modified to issuing ballots for members voting within the 72 hour Conscent period.
LOR
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
https://www.microboss.org [microboss.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.microboss.org/__;!!PtGJab4!-EgHB7XjqE...> |
[image: Image][facebook.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/microbosstech/__;!!PtGJa...>
[image: Image][linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/__...>
[image: Image][mobile.twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech__;!!PtGJ...>
[image: Image][instagram.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en__;...>
[image: Image][youtube.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/@microboss__;!!PtGJab4!-E...>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. ------------------------------
*From:* Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> *Sent:* Saturday, May 9, 2026 8:08:38 PM *To:* farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> *Cc:* Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts <lawrence@microboss.org>; GNSO council < council@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [council] Re: GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts
Well I hope we can do so at this May meeting and that is why I asked the two questions below about the "no objection after 72 hours consent process". If Council does not agree to that process, then I don't know what would bar the Council from approving referring an issue to the SPIRT for consultation purposes on a case-by-case basis? I think Council can certainly do that right now as the supervisor of the SPIRT under its Charter.
Agree the process should be clarified but if Council does not approve it at the May meeting (as may be modified by friendly amendment), then I think that under our Operating Procedures, there can still be an email vote on a Motion to send the RSP issue to the SPIRT for further deliberation. We would not want to hold this one up based on the fact that Council has not approved a process for allowing the SPIRIT to have issues referred to it by Council. The reason is that this directly affects RSP approval processes ongoing right now at ICANN.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese
GNSO Councilor
NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026
anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 8:59 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Anne
In order to do this we need a process. I raised my concerns with the process Lawrence provided. We should address those concerns, approve the process then attend to the matter that they want to bring. At the moment, we don’t have a process to authorize them.
Farzaneh
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 11:33 AM Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Farzaneh,
There may be some urgency for the SPIRT to consider the RSP issue since it relates to ICANN's process for RSP qualification and applicants are currently identifying qualified RSPs. After reviewing the May 7 SPIRT meeting, I agree it's appropriate for Council to authorize the SPIRT to look into this issue. I don't actually think we need to approve a 72 hour consent by non-objection process in order to do this but that is how the Motion has been framed so that is why I asked the questions below.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese
GNSO Councilor
NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026
anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 7:17 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there
We haven’t yet agreed to the process and the motion hasn’t addressed all the concerns. Shouldn’t we first work on the process?
Farzaneh
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 10:03 AM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following:
1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion?
2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT?
I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese
GNSO Councilor
NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026
anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026.
*Motion: *
· https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... [docs.google.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmh...>
On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member.
*Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form:*
- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... [docs.google.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIk...>
The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process.
*Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS *
The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451.
As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement.
-----
*Error! Filename not specified.*
*Error! Filename not specified.*
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
*Error! Filename not specified.*
*Error! Filename not specified.*
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
*Error! Filename not specified.*
https://www.microboss.org [microboss.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.microboss.org/__;!!PtGJab4!-EgHB7XjqE...> |
*Error! Filename not specified.*[facebook.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.facebook.com/microbosstech/__;!!PtGJa...>
*Error! Filename not specified.*[linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/__...>
*Error! Filename not specified.*[mobile.twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech__;!!PtGJ...>
*Error! Filename not specified.*[instagram.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en__;...>
*Error! Filename not specified.*[youtube.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/@microboss__;!!PtGJab4!-E...>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Anne, Thank you for the clarifying questions, I will attempt to answer them but expect Council leadership and staff to weigh in. On the level of objection required to withhold consent, a determination would need to be made by Council leadership in consultation with members. However, one councilor or stakeholder group may be too lean a threshold to stop an issue being referred to SPIRT from the Council. I believe an objection by Council leadership on referring an issue to SPIRT, should also get full council concurrence. On your second question it is mandatory as Per the SPIRT Charter, “For any Type 3 issue, which is considered a policy change to be referred to the GNSO Council by the SPIRT. This is hard oded in the charter for implementation, In the case of a Type 2 issues where ICANN Org disagrees with the SPIRT’s recommendation, the SPIRT shall come back to confer with the GNSO Council. Speaking directly to your 2nd question, I believe the intent is for the SPIRT to resolve the issue if it is categorized as Type 2, whilst ICANN Org resolves issues categorized as Type 1 and inform the SPIRT team. All Type 3 issues however fall under the remit of the Council to be resolved. LoR ----- [Image] [Image] Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> [Image] [Image] …collaboration to enhance communication. [Image] https://www.microboss.org<https://www.microboss.org/> | [Image]<https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech> [Image]<https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en> [Image]<https://www.youtube.com/@microboss> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. ________________________________ From: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2026 3:02 PM To: Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts <lawrence@microboss.org> Cc: GNSO council <council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following: 1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion? 2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT? I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council <council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026. Motion: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member. Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form: * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq3pg/edit?usp=sharing> The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process. Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451. As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement. ----- [Image] [Image] Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Global President & Managing Director Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org<mailto:Lawrence@microboss.org> [Image] [Image] …collaboration to enhance communication. [Image] https://www.microboss.org<https://www.microboss.org/> | [Image]<https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/> [Image]<https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech> [Image]<https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en> [Image]<https://www.youtube.com/@microboss> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss. Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org<mailto:council@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org<mailto:council-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you, Lawrence. I don't think the Council can vote to approve the process unless the answers to these questions are clear. This is because of the nature of a 72 hour non-objection provision. That process doesn't specify the manner of lodging objection by Council or the specific nature of the assignment to the SPIRT, e.g. come up with a solution and implement it with Org and/or come up with an analysis and propose alternatives to Council? It's quite difficult to apply a procedure that actually involves no discussion at the Council level of the specific issue involved and that discussion is extremely unlikely to happen in a "negative response" 72 hour time frame. Regarding the RSP Qualification issue, it appears to be fairly urgent based on what Jeff has said but I have also wondered about the fact that it is not ICANN Org raising the issue and Council does not have the benefit of the ICANN Org viewpoint on this issue. The proposed new process the SPIRT is asking for essentially puts the SPIRT in the position of raising an issue itself. In this case, it is apparently the RySG via Jeff Neuman raising the issue. At the time of Charter drafting,I think we thought that if something like this came up, the RySG would raise it directly itself at Council and then Council could choose to ask the SPIRT to act on it. The proposed SPIRT alert process may be more efficient in the long run but for us on Council, (1) we have not heard directly from the RySG on this and (2) we have not heard from ICANN Org re the implications for RSP qualification, which is strictly an Org function. New issues and procedures are always a bit complicated so thank you for your patience and willingness to keep working to refine this proposal! Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 2:18 PM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts < lawrence@microboss.org> wrote:
Dear Anne,
Thank you for the clarifying questions, I will attempt to answer them but expect Council leadership and staff to weigh in.
On the level of objection required to withhold consent, a determination would need to be made by Council leadership in consultation with members. However, one councilor or stakeholder group may be too lean a threshold to stop an issue being referred to SPIRT from the Council.
I believe an objection by Council leadership on referring an issue to SPIRT, should also get full council concurrence.
On your second question it is mandatory as Per the SPIRT Charter, “For any Type 3 issue, which is considered a policy change to be referred to the GNSO Council by the SPIRT. This is hard oded in the charter for implementation, In the case of a Type 2 issues where ICANN Org disagrees with the SPIRT’s recommendation, the SPIRT shall come back to confer with the GNSO Council.
Speaking directly to your 2nd question, I believe the intent is for the SPIRT to resolve the issue if it is categorized as Type 2, whilst ICANN Org resolves issues categorized as Type 1 and inform the SPIRT team. All Type 3 issues however fall under the remit of the Council to be resolved.
LoR
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. ------------------------------ *From:* Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> *Sent:* Saturday, May 9, 2026 3:02 PM *To:* Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts <lawrence@microboss.org> *Cc:* GNSO council <council@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [council] GNSO Council Motion for SPIRT Alerts
Thanks Lawrence. Could you please clarify the following:
1. In the proposed 72 hour non-objection process that has the effect of sending an issue to the SPIRT for deliberation, what level of objection or raising the issue to the Council level for discussion is required? Is it objection by one Councilor. Objection by Leadership? Is this specified in the Motion?
2. Where in the Motion or in the form advising Council of the issue does it specify that the SPIRT will bring a recommendation back to Council for its consideration? Or do we intend for the SPIRIT to resolve the issue itself once the Council has given the 72 hour "consent by non-objection" to the SPIRT?
I apologize if I have missed the above points in the Motion or in the form submitted which summarizes the important RSP qualification issue. Thanks again for all your hard work.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 4:26 AM Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
I submit for your approval and secondment a motion for the GNSO Council Consideration of SPIRT Alert Request process at our meeting for the 21st May, 2026.
*Motion: *
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_5rUrQrAPRZmhcMQsE7bnzRULJEiNHZrmc5NPSOu...>
On Council's approval of the Consideration Request for SPIRT Alerts in the motion above, the SPIRT would like to be permitted by the GNSO Council to discuss a matter on RSP Applications brought before the SPIRT by the Registry Stakeholder Group through a member.
*Link to SPIRT Issue Submission Form:*
-
*https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPtqQL9hZvoIkQsh6Z3bwzDxGgRdXgiYlW_0BMAq...>
The GNSO Council approval sort aligns with the SPIRT charter and adopted process.
*Brief of Issue - RSP APPLICATIONS *
The Registry Service Provider (RSP) Handbook sets out the evaluation process for providers seeking qualification to offer services to new generic top-level domain (gTLD) applicants in the New gTLD Program and currently mandates prospective RSP's to attest that all Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extensions they intend to use are registered with IANA in accordance with RFC 7451 and indicate whether they do, or will, refrain from using any EPP extensions that are not registered with IANA pursuant to RFC 7451.
As ICANN agreed to remove the requirement that Registry Operators limit their use to EPP extensions reflected in the IANA registry, the RSP Handbook has not updated to reflect this change and as a result, pre-evaluated RSPs are still required to commit to using only IANA-registered EPP extensions in order to pass evaluation. Thus RSPs must make commitments that their Registry Operators are no longer required to make under the Base Registry Agreement. Accordingly, the RySG requests that SPIRT and ICANN org consider revising the RSP Handbook to align it with the Base Registry Agreement.
-----
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*Lawrence* *Olawale-Roberts* Global President & Managing Director
Mobile: +234 8070892705, (0)8056 3333 97 Lawrence@microboss.org
[image: Image]
[image: Image]
*…collaboration to enhance communication*.
[image: Image]
[image: Image] <https://www.facebook.com/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/microbosstech/>
[image: Image] <https://mobile.twitter.com/microbosstech>
[image: Image] <https://www.instagram.com/microbosstech/?hl=en>
[image: Image] <https://www.youtube.com/@microboss>
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it,
use it or disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of the sender and his company MicroBoss.
Kindly note that whilst we scan all e-mails for viruses, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is virus-free. | Do consider the environment before printing this email. _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (4)
-
Andrew Chen -
Anne ICANN -
farzaneh badii -
Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts