Donna, I have raised it with Byron. Bart From: "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date: Sunday 11 March 2018 at 14:53 To: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org>, "CSC-review@icann.org" <CSC-review@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: [CSC-Review] FW: [EXTERNAL] RE: PLS READ: Version 6 Thanks Bart, this looks good to me. With regards the CSC meeting today, is it possible to arrive at 5pm and provide a 10 minute update basically to explain that we were not able to post our report for public comment and will now do so in a week or so, but there are no changes to what we’ve reported previously. From: Bart Boswinkel [mailto:bart.boswinkel@icann.org] Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2018 9:41 AM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; CSC-review@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-Review] FW: [EXTERNAL] RE: PLS READ: Version 6 Donna, all, Please find included draft deck Please note you are also invited today at CSC meeting from 17.00-18.30. Most likely that will be short meeting Kind regards, BArt From: CSC-Review <csc-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "Austin, Donna via CSC-Review" <CSC-review@icann.org> Reply-To: "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date: Friday 9 March 2018 at 19:33 To: "CSC-review@icann.org" <CSC-review@icann.org> Subject: [CSC-Review] FW: [EXTERNAL] RE: PLS READ: Version 6 Bart Is it possible for you to develop a deck of the key points contained in the attached so that this can be used for meetings with the RySG and ccNSO? Thanks Donna From: Martin Boyle [mailto:martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 5:07 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [CSC-Review] PLS READ: Version 6 Thanks Donna, This all looks quite satisfactory to me. I had a couple of additional comments and minor suggestions, which I have inserted in the clean copy, attached. For the table in section 6, I note that we still have item 5 as well as item 6, which cover the same ground. Under 14 right at the end of the proposed wording section I would suggest, “… at the request of either one or more members of the PTI Board or the CSC.” The reasons are that I think in this case it is the PTI (but transferable to a new operator) and I think we are probably particularly interested in the views of the independent directors. Number 20, “… by the members constituency (ie the RySG or the ccNSO).” Although I’m not really convinced we need to specify, so the wording in red (and the text it replaces) could be dropped! I note that my comments on numbers 7 and 12 about needing to provide text (and in 18, 23 & 24 also need some response to comments. Thanks Martin From: CSC-Review <csc-review-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Austin, Donna via CSC-Review Sent: 07 March 2018 01:01 To: CSC-review@icann.org Subject: [CSC-Review] PLS READ: Version 6 Hi All Sorry this is taking so long. I’m not quite there yet, but if I could ask if folks could review the document up to Section 6. Proposed Changes to the CSC Charter that would be greatly appreciated. I’ve attached a redline and a clean version (the clean version stops after the section on travel support). Thanks Donna Donna Austin Neustar, Inc. / Senior Policy Manager, Registry Solutions Mobile: +1 310 890 9655 donna.austin@team.neustar / Website: home.neustar Follow Neustar: LinkedIn / Twitter Reduce your environmental footprint. Print only if necessary. The information contained in this email message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this email message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.