Yes, we need an internal discussion before engaging with the GAC. It is not likely that we reach full consensus among ourselves, nor will there be a full consensus within the GAC. What I hope for is that we can identify elements of the geonames issue that we agree upon internally, and find out what our GAC interlocutors think about them in intersessional discussion between ICANN65 and 66.

From: registration-issues-wg <registration-issues-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 7:30 PM
To: cpwg@icann.org
Subject: [registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] Policy Discussion at 65 - Geo names?

Sounded like we needed a discussion on geo names prior to making commitments with the GAC. Should that be our discussion at 65? Marita (perhaps with Greg) are you able to lead such a discussion?

Jonathan Zuck | Executive Director | Innovators Network

jzuck@innovatorsnetwork.org | O 202.420.7497 | S jvzuck |