- CPWG - lists.icann.org

At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call
by ICANN Policy Calendar Dec. 11, 2019

Dec. 11, 2019

Dear All, The next At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call is scheduled for Wednesday, 18 December 2019 at 19:00 UTC for 90 mins. For other times: https://community.icann.org/x/UAJxBw The agenda (to be updated) and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/UAJxBw Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566 / Meeting ID: 765-717-566 - Please note, the zoom room link and Meeting ID will remain the same for each weekly meeting. Real time transcription (RTT) available at (subject to availability): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net] [streamtext.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.streamtext.net_pla…> ADIGO Conference Bridge: EN: 1638 ES: 1738 Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 Other toll-free numbers: https://www.adigo.com/icann [adigo.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.adigo.com_icann&d=…> At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Wiki Space: https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Kind regards, At-Large Staff ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org [atlarge.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__atlarge.icann.org_&d=D…> Facebook: facebook.com/icann [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…>atlarge [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…> Twitter: @ [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANNAtLar…>ICANNAtLarge [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANNAtLar…>

1 0

SSAC 107, Comment to NIST
by Evin Erdogdu Dec. 11, 2019

Dec. 11, 2019

Dear CPWG Members, The recently published "SAC107: SSAC Comment to NIST on Quantum Cryptography Algorithms?", may be of interest. Please find the SSAC comment at the link below: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-107-en.pdf Thank you, Evin?

1 0

REMINDER / Meeting invitation: At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call on Wednesday, 11 December 2019 at 13:00 UTC
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 11, 2019

Dec. 11, 2019

Dear All, The next At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call is scheduled for Wednesday, 11 December 2019 at 13:00 UTC for 90 mins. For other times: https://tinyurl.com/vvvlx22 The agenda (to be updated) and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/wgJhBw Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566 / Meeting ID: 765-717-566 – Please note, the zoom room link and Meeting ID will remain the same for each weekly meeting. Real time transcription (RTT) available at (subject to availability): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net] [streamtext.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.streamtext.net_pla…> ADIGO Conference Bridge: EN: 1638 ES: 1738 Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 Other toll-free numbers: https://www.adigo.com/icann [adigo.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.adigo.com_icann&d=…> At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Wiki Space: https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Kind regards, At-Large Staff ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org [atlarge.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__atlarge.icann.org_&d=D…> Facebook: facebook.com/icann [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…>atlarge [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…> Twitter: @ [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANNAtLar…>ICANNAtLarge [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANNAtLar…>

4 3

ICANN blog : .org update
by Dev Anand Teelucksingh Dec. 10, 2019

Dec. 10, 2019

https://www.icann.org/news/blog/org-update

1 0

The PIR sale
by Roberto Gaetano Dec. 8, 2019

Dec. 8, 2019

Hi all. While submitting my thoughts to Jonathan for the consolidated ALAC document to present to ICANN, it occurred to me that analysing the past facts there are also questions that we want to submit to Ethos/PIR and ISOC. Maybe some of the questions to Ethos/PIR and/or ISOC have been asked already in the meantime, but I kept them for completion. I am therefore posting this - unfortunately long - contribution for discussion within ALAC. The initial award of the contract to PIR The core of the matter is whether ISOC/PIR were chosen because of their non profit status. The counter argument is that the Board insisted in having a bid that was open also to commercial parties. At the time I was not in any of the bodies who made the decisions, but as a former Chair of the DNSO General Assembly I had some exchange of opinions about this and I was firmly convinced that this stance has been taken in order to limit the possibility of Verisign to raise issues with USG that could invalid the bid and/or to appeal to the court for biased behaviour of ICANN. In simple words, although the orientation was to have .org managed by a non-profit, ICANN was very weak at the time and highly exposed to Verisign lawsuits, and therefore had to move carefully. The proof is in the pudding: when the contract was awarded to ISOC/PIR there were some constraints that were directly related to the Public Interest commitment of that bid. The questions are therefore: * to ICANN - did the consideration that ISOC/PIR was a non-profit, and therefore a further step towards achieving the declared purpose of ICANN about introducing diversification and competition in the domain name market, an element that the Board took into account in making a decision? If so, why is the situation so much changed that ICANN allows the major gTLDs to be concentrated in for-profit hands? Would this not be a risk of commercial organisations to form a cartel that can adversely influence the market? How is a monopoly by Verisign, that was the target of ICANN’s action at the time, substantially different from a cartel between the major commercial registry operators that will arise if PIR starts operating for profit? Does ICANN have sufficient guarantees that Verisign is not behind this operation to eliminate a competitor? The last question is not peregrine, considering the operation that Verisign has crafted about .web, creating a puppet company to successfully counter Afilias’ bid, all without ICANN seeing anything strange about it. * to Ethos - what is the position of the company about the commitments in the initial contract, like for instance to have an Advisory Council that has been over the years a link between the non-commercial and non-profit community and the Registry? As a side note, the original commitment was to have a representative from the NCUC, under my PIR chairmanship we changed NCUC to NCSG and reserved one seat for ALAC as well, with the consideration that the scenario had changed after the ICANN reform. It would be important to keep this two-way communication with the new PIR. * to ISOC - no questions The Multi-Stakeholder model There has been an effort over the years to progress towards equal representation of the stakeholders. This has been a success story for ICANN, who has been instrumental in the adoption of this philosophy in other fora (e.g. IGF) and in the stake-holderism becoming a reference in debates about governance models. ICANN has been proactive over the years in balancing commercial and non-commercial views and voices - even voting power. This is a clear sign of an approach that would value non-profits being an essential element that tries to balance the power of for-profit enterprises. One clear example in this sense is the review of the GNSO, when the commercial and non-commercial users were given equal power in the reviewed GNSO while the previous situation was that commercial companies had three constituencies (i.e. three votes) while the non-commercial users had only one. I was the Chair of the Structural Improvement Committee and of the GNSO Review Working Group at the time, so I have a lot of details that can be brought to the discussion. The example is indeed about action in the non-contracted party house, but indicates IMHO a general philosophy that ICANN has that would apply also to the contracted party house. This trend will be reversed if/when ICANN endorses the transfer of the .org registry to a commercial company. Moreover, PIR has been instrumental in some fights for the public interest, endorsing SSAC recommendations like the position against the wildcard that Verisign had introduced for its own profit and against the interest of the Internet users. The questions are therefore: * to ICANN - does the endorsement of a move of PIR to the commercial camp mark a change from the expoused commitment to equal multi-stakeholderism? If not, is ICANN willing to mark the point and suspend the approval in order to have Board, Staff and the Community to have a deeper look at the matter? If not, what are the measures that ICANN plans to propose to balance this shift from non-commercial to commercial power and marked presence? Does ICANN realise that this change will also alter the balance within the Registry Stakeholder Group and if so are there any measures that ICANN proposes to alleviate the consequences? Does ICANN realise that it will be losing an essential ally in fights that ICANN Advisory Committees, notably SSAC, is conducting for the benefit of the whole Internet community as opposed to the benefit of private interests? Who does ICANN think it will now have among large gTLD Registries as supporter of SSAC Recommendations - that are not binding - now that PIR is likely to change camp? Does ICANN realise that at this point in time the SSAC itself is likely to become irrelevant because the commercial registries cartel could simply disregard the advice? Does ICANN have a plan B and can this be shared with the community? * to Ethos - over time PIR has taken a lot of commitments based on putting the Public Interest above the financial interest of the company itself. Does Ethos stick with this approach - and is therefore ready to sign a formal commitment? If not, does Ethos think that it is appropriate for a Registry that does not take formal commitments for the public interest to still be called “Public Interest Registry”? What is Ethos’ position vs formal recommendations that come from technical ICANN advisory committees like SSAC and RSSAC? What is Ethos’ position vs formal recommendations that come from ALAC, the advisory committee that is representing the user community and therefore the public interest? * to ISOC - no questions The sale itself I have to confess that I have been taken by surprise by the sale. However, linking this with some trends in the years I have been on the PIR Board - also as Chair for a while - I now have a better picture of the whereabouts. The point here is that we need to put ourselves in a Trustee's shoes and follow the money -ooops, I meant follow the reasoning. If PIR is not considered a valid steady supply of money, it is obvious that an alternative has to be found. I personally do not believe the story that Ethos’ proposal came out of the blue and everybody in ISOC was taken by surprise. None of the actors in this soap opera came out of the blue, all are insiders. To try to make us to believe that there have not been contacts for months, or even years, is an insult to our intelligence. This said, we must deal with the current situation and the way we got here is irrelevant - or at least less important - in this phase. The only fact is that the transaction happened in the dark, that those who knew pretend they did not know, that an asset that is earmarked as “Public Interest” is traded without any possible interaction with the voices that represent the public interest. The questions are therefore: * to ICANN - Is it normal that such a transaction, that has so much impact for the community, happens without a public comment period? Is it too late to start such public comment period before endorsing the change? We have public comments as a rule - or at least as a practice. People will not understand if ICANN gives a stamp of approval to a transaction of this importance without opening a consultation. Of course, it will be well understood that the result of the consultation will not be binding for ICANN’s decision, but not even to hold the PIR transfer until we have a feedback from the community will undermine ICANN’s image vs the public interest. ALAC should recommend to hold the transaction and open a public comment phase. * to Ethos - when the asset was bought, was it understood that PIR via .org was playing a substantial role in the ecosystem being the only large gTLD operating in the public interest as non-profit? Does Ethos plan to continue this role - regardless the formal for-profit company form? What are the engagements that can be formalised in a binding contract that could support this approach? Are there any plans to further trade PIR assets to, e.g., a registrars consortium that via vertical integration could provide better return on investment at the detriment of the public interest? Would Ethos/PIR be ready to go beyond the simple affirmation of intents - that can be changed at any time and that do not carry weight in a court - and sign a formal commitment like a contract with ICANN? * to ISOC - I remember ISOC putting a lot of pressure to PIR for the rebid of the back end contract. The issue was to make sure that we had a completely open and transparent bit, which of course PIR did. How comes that the requirements for a PIR subcontract do not apply for the mother company? Does ISOC realise that this is yet another instance of “do what I say, not what I do”? Do ISOC chapters realise that they have had no input - as vehicle from the field - in this transaction? Can we have an official statement from the ISOC Chapter representatives on the Board of Trustees - some Chapters are also ALAC ALSes - on why they supported this sale and how the public interest has played a role in this? Does ISOC realise that it has lost the trust from large part of the people who are aware of the domain name issues - who are the core of the supporters historically? Do the ISOC chapters realise that they are becoming irrelevant facing the role that the IETF Trustees have taken on the ISOC Board and the collusion with the organisational members? In summary, my personal opinion is that we should ask ICANN to wait before granting its approval until after a consultation is carried on and until Ethos/PIR have cleared their position vis-à-vis taking binding commitments about their future behaviour in the Public Interest. As for the questions to ISOC I would expect the ISOC Chapters - in particular those who are active in ALAC - to express their opinion on the sale. Cheers, Roberto

2 1

***Starting in 20 Mins*** REMINDER / Meeting invitation: At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call on Wednesday, 04 December 2019 at 20:00 UTC
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 7, 2019

Dec. 7, 2019

Dear All, The next At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call is scheduled for Wednesday, 04 December 2019 at 20:00 UTC for 90 mins. For other times: https://tinyurl.com/udrvpdb The agenda and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/6JgzBw Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566 / Meeting ID: 765-717-566 – Please note, the zoom room link and Meeting ID will remain the same for each weekly meeting. Real time transcription (RTT) available at (subject to availability): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net] [streamtext.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.streamtext.net_pla…> ADIGO Conference Bridge: EN: 3535 ES: 1738 Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 Other toll-free numbers: https://www.adigo.com/icann [adigo.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.adigo.com_icann&d=…> At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Wiki Space: https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Kind regards, At-Large Staff ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org [atlarge.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__atlarge.icann.org_&d=D…> Facebook: facebook.com/icann [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…>atlarge [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…> Twitter: @ [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANNAtLar…>ICANNAtLarge [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANNAtLar…>

6 6

Fwd: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] ICANN67 Topic Proposal - DNS Marketplace
by Maureen Hilyard Dec. 6, 2019

Dec. 6, 2019

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Tanzanica S. King <tanzanica.king(a)icann.org> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019, 9:14 AM Subject: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] ICANN67 Topic Proposal - DNS Marketplace To: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning < soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning(a)icann.org> Dear All, Please see the detailed proposal for DNS Marketplace below. I’ve also attached a PDF with all three proposals for your reference. Best regards, Tanzanica *Proposed Topic #3* *Proposed Session Title * * *The Domain Name Services Marketplace - Market dynamics, business models and commercial drivers* *Group/Affiliation **** GNSO RySG *Contact Name **** Jonathan Robinson *Brief Description (max 250 words) **** An education, outreach and engagement session aimed at improving broader community understanding of the key dynamics of the industry sector on which the finances of ICANN and the ICANN community are based. Generic Top Level Domain Registries and Registrars occupy a unique position within the ICANN community in that they are directly contracted with ICANN. Moreover, ICANN's current funding model depends on the commercial success these domain name businesses. This session will provide insights into the current marketplace for domain names and related services as well as the dynamics driving change within that market place. Second, it will provide insight into the various business models of service providers within the marketplace and the key drivers of these business models. Third, it will create the opportunity for questions, answers and discussions around key business and economic aspects of the businesses and how these may need to be considered within the broader ICANN Community and policy making functions. In addition to the development of the market, topics such as the secondary market for domain names, approaches to abuse and issues with resellers will be covered by Registrars. From Registries, consideration will be given to the different approaches generic (open) TLDs, brand TLDs and geographic TLDs, as well as key contractual requirements. *Rationale/Desired Outcomes **** A recent session targeted at ensuring that ICANN Board members have a robust understanding of the variety of Registrar and Registry approaches to the marketplace was very well-received. Following on from the session with the ICANN Board it was proposed that a similar, expanded and interactive session with the broader community could provide good value to all. Policy making that is well-informed by fact is clearly optimal. Such policy making includes having the best access to all data including an understanding of the commercial drivers of the protagonists. The domain name services sector has seen far reaching changes take place over a number of years including the development of a range a diversity of business models within both Registry and Registrar business. Extensive competition has developed in some areas and substantial consolidation and corporate transactions continue to take place. The broader ICANN community will benefit from an understanding of the key marketplace drivers and dynamics when considering all future policy, including high-profile current issues such as future rounds of new gTLDs. *Session Format **** Given the outreach and informative nature of the session, it is expected that it will be biased towards presentation of material. But, emphasis will be placed on question, answer and discussion as well as any other techniques to drive levels of interactivity. *Session Leaders/Facilitators **** To be confirmed *Community Interest **** Broad. As above, the business and commercial drivers of the registry and registrar businesses underpin their own finances as well as those of ICANN. This is a crucial pillar of understanding for the broad community and so interest is expected to be high and broad. _______________________________________________ SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning _______________________________________________ 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.

1 0

Suggestion : Retiring the gTLD and Registration-issues-wg mailing lists
by Dev Anand Teelucksingh Dec. 6, 2019

Dec. 6, 2019

Dear All, Since the decision to redirect emails from cpwg(a)icann.org to the gtld-wg.atlarge-lists.icann.org and registration-issues-wg.atlarge-lists.icann.org lists some time ago, one consequence of this is that different subject lines like [registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] or [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] appear to those that are on the three mailing lists. Worse, threaded conversations are potentially broken depending on who responds to which list. In theory, persons can individually unsubscribe from the gtld-wg and registration-issues-wg but the far simpler and more straightforward thing to do is to retire the gtld-wg lists and registration-issues-wg lists by 1) staff documenting who are on the gtld-wg list and registration-issues lists 2) staff removing everyone except themselves from the gtld-wg lists and registration-issues lists 3) staff posting a last email, noting the reasons why the list was being retired so that future At-Large has a clearer picture of why the list was retired and perhaps noting for historical purposes who was on the list when the list was retired. Thoughts? Dev Anand

5 4

At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call
by ICANN Policy Calendar Dec. 6, 2019

Dec. 6, 2019

Dear All, The next At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call is scheduled for Wednesday, 11 December 2019 at 13:00 UTC for 90 mins. For other times: https://tinyurl.com/vvvlx22 The agenda (to be updated) and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/wgJhBw Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566 / Meeting ID: 765-717-566 - Please note, the zoom room link and Meeting ID will remain the same for each weekly meeting. Real time transcription (RTT) available at (subject to availability): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net] [streamtext.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.streamtext.net_pla…> ADIGO Conference Bridge: EN: 1638 ES: 1738 Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 Other toll-free numbers: https://www.adigo.com/icann [adigo.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.adigo.com_icann&d=…> At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Wiki Space: https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Kind regards, At-Large Staff ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org [atlarge.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__atlarge.icann.org_&d=D…> Facebook: facebook.com/icann [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…>atlarge [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…> Twitter: @ [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANNAtLar…>ICANNAtLarge [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANNAtLar…>

2 1

ICANN67 Plenary Session (High Interest Topics HIT) - DEADLINE REMINDER! Topic Proposals Due Wed, 4 December
by Gisella Gruber Dec. 6, 2019

Dec. 6, 2019

Dear All, Apologies if there was confusion! I gathered this information below from the list. Please confirm this is correct if your name is against one of these. Thank you. Kind regards, Gisella *************** Suggestion by Javier (MAIN PLENARY/HIT ?) Seconded by: Seth Reiss, Alberto Soto and Roberto * * “ICANN & International Law”. (ICANN’s duties -if any- under International Law; obligations of multinational corps under International Law; ICANN as a UN observer; and any discussion or debate in that vein...). *Comment by Roberto: Let me also support Javier’s proposal. As a personal comment, I remember that in Montreal ISOC invited us to a lunch where the issue of extraterritoriality was discussed. I believe that extraterritoriality does not apply only to laws of a country that create situations outside its borders, but also to behaviour of private corporations that end up in being a de facto law. Suggestion by Holly (MAIN PLENARY/HIT ?) Seconded by Natalia * DoH/DoT (CNS over HTTPS/DNS Over TLS) Suggestion by Roberto (AT-LARGE) * Different experiences about individuals in different regions. Suggestion by Natalia (AT-LARGE) * ALSs mobilization * At-Large + RIRs + ALSs (collaboration and future perspectives) * MSM From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard(a)gmail.com> Date: Thursday, 5 December 2019 at 16:18 To: "Roberto Gaetano (gmail)" <mail.roberto.gaetano(a)gmail.com> Cc: Natalia Filina <filinafilka(a)gmail.com>, Daniel Nanghaka <dndannang(a)gmail.com>, "cpwg(a)icann.org" <cpwg(a)icann.org>, "icann67-pc(a)icann.org" <icann67-pc(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] [Icann67-pc] DEADLINE REMINDER! Topic Proposals Due Wed, 4 December Hi everyone I hope we havent confused people. Gisella's original note referred to the high interest topics that Tanzanica is requesting for the ICANN plenaries. These require being proposed on a particular form. There are however some very interesting topics for the At-Large sessions in Cancun and these will be noted for discussion at our next ICANN67 meeting. M On Thu, 5 Dec 2019, 2:43 AM Roberto Gaetano, <mail.roberto.gaetano(a)gmail.com<mailto:mail.roberto.gaetano@gmail.com>> wrote: If it is not too late, I would like to remind that I have asked for ICANN-66 a session on the different experiences about individuals in different regions. This has not been possible, so I would like to suggest it again for the next meeting. Let me also support Javier’s proposal. As a personal comment, I remember that in Montreal ISOC invited us to a lunch where the issue of extraterritoriality was discussed. I believe that extraterritoriality does not apply only to laws of a country that create situations outside its borders, but also to behaviour of private corporations that end up in being a de facto law. Cheers, Roberto On 05.12.2019, at 07:39, Natalia Filina <filinafilka(a)gmail.com<mailto:filinafilka@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Gisella, Very sorry for the delay. I propose sessions: DoH (+1 to Holly) ALSs mobilization At-Large+RIRs+ALSs (collaboration and future perspectives) MSM Sincerely, Natalia Filina Secretary of EURALO https://atlarge.icann.org/alses/euralo [atlarge.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__atlarge.icann.org_alse…> https://individualusers.org/ [individualusers.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__individualusers.org_&d…> Member of ALAC Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement Officer of SIG IoT (ISOC) +7 906 722 54 61 Moscow, Russian Federation чт, 5 дек. 2019 г. в 08:15, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang(a)gmail.com<mailto:dndannang@gmail.com>>: I propose having a face 2 face session for O&E SC On Tue, Dec 3, 2019, 5:57 PM Gisella Gruber <Gisella.Gruber(a)icann.org<mailto:Gisella.Gruber@icann.org>> wrote: Dear All, A friendly reminder that topic proposals for ICANN67 are due by this Wednesday, 4 December 2019 at 23:00 UTC. Could you kindly send through topics via email in order to coordinate submission, should we so wish to do. Thank you. Kind regards, Gisella From: registration-issues-wg <registration-issues-wg-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard(a)gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard@gmail.com>> Date: Monday, 2 December 2019 at 22:31 To: "cpwg(a)icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>" <cpwg(a)icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: [registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] Fwd: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] DEADLINE REMINDER! Topic Proposals Due Wed, 4 December For your discussion and contribution to the plenary session topics if you have one to raise for ICANN67 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Tanzanica S. King <tanzanica.king(a)icann.org<mailto:tanzanica.king@icann.org>> Date: Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 8:59 AM Subject: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] DEADLINE REMINDER! Topic Proposals Due Wed, 4 December To: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning(a)icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning@icann.org>> Dear Community Leaders: A friendly reminder that topic proposals for ICANN67 are due by this Wednesday, 4 December 2019 at 23:00 UTC. Please submit your proposals to the Plenary Topic Proposal Form [icann.wufoo.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.wufoo.com_forms_…> as soon as possible. During the Kickoff in Montréal, you identified the following potential topics for future plenary sessions: * DNS and the Internet of Things (IoT) * The DNS Marketplace * Innovation in the DNS Please note that a form must be submitted for each topic to be considered. Upcoming Production Dates 4 December Plenary Topic Proposals Due 5 December Production Call 1: Discussion of Plenary Topics 5-12 December Further discussion via email and final selection of topics 13 December Final Topics/Block Schedule Posted 13-23 December Schedule Planning 2 January Session Request Submissions Open (SO/AC Requests Only) Best regards, Tanzanica _______________________________________________ Tanzanica S. King Sr. Manager, Meeting Strategy and Design ICANN Office +1 310 301 5800 Mobile +1 310 995 3038 www.icann.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMGaQ&…> ICANN Community Wiki Pages: Scheduling Resources and Links<https://community.icann.org/x/oq2jBg> Comprehensive List of Plenary Session Topics<https://community.icann.org/x/fJMzBw> _______________________________________________ SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning(a)icann.org<mailto:SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning _______________________________________________ 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 [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>). 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. _______________________________________________ Icann67-pc mailing list Icann67-pc(a)icann.org<mailto:Icann67-pc@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/icann67-pc _______________________________________________ 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 [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>). 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. _______________________________________________ Icann67-pc mailing list Icann67-pc(a)icann.org<mailto:Icann67-pc@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/icann67-pc _______________________________________________ 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 [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>). 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. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG(a)icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ 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 [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>). 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. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG(a)icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ 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 [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_…>). 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.

4 3