Dear all, I have gone through the progress report after Heather's answers to my questions. To make it easier to read I have accepted some of the more "linguistic" comments. Please see some new remarks from me. Kind regards Annebeth From: <ctn-crosscom-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ctn-crosscom-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Timo Võhmar <timo.vohmar@internet.ee<mailto:timo.vohmar@internet.ee>> Date: Thursday 1 September 2016 22:25 To: Heather Forrest <Heather.Forrest@acu.edu.au<mailto:Heather.Forrest@acu.edu.au>> Cc: "ctn-crosscom@icann.org<mailto:ctn-crosscom@icann.org>" <ctn-crosscom@icann.org<mailto:ctn-crosscom@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Ctn-crosscom] invitation to submit comments or questions related to the post-Helsinki progress report Hi Heather Just to clarify, my proposal was not to remove reference to PDP but to rephrase that part of the conclusion with two options - new CWG and PDP. Added my suggestion in the doc. Best Regards, Timo Võhmar On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Heather Forrest <Heather.Forrest@acu.edu.au<mailto:Heather.Forrest@acu.edu.au>> wrote: Dear all, I have followed up in answering Annebeth's questions in the comments and have no fundamental objections. On one point I believe we have duplicate text in two places so we need to decide where to put it. I've noted that in a reply comment. New version attached. I do not agree with Timo's proposal at the end of the document to remove the reference in the recommendations section to the charter of the Subsequent Procedures PDP. This should not be a controversial statement, as the Charter is available and a public document. Kind regards, Heather Forrest