Dear all, Following our earlier emails, staff has prepared a draft update and proposed way forward. Included is the version 01 draft Final report As you will see the major changes are: 1. Leave the recommendations “as is”. The feed-back received, in particular on recommendation C is even more divergent then the recommendations themselves. 2. Some comments deal with the conclusions pertaining to the use of 2-letters, 3-letters codes and full name of countries and territories. Staff suggest that these different views and opinions are summarized and included in the report, as an annex. Goal is that the next group, however structured is properly informed about the different views in the community. Proposed Agenda Tuesday, 23 May 2017 at 20:00 UTC: 1. Welcome and roll call 2. Public comment summary 3. Update Interim report/ Final report 4. Next steps 5. Next call 6. Closure Kind regards, Bart From: <ctn-crosscom-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org> Date: Wednesday 10 May 2017 at 16:07 To: "ctn-crosscom@icann.org" <ctn-crosscom@icann.org> Subject: [Ctn-crosscom] Public comments Interim Report , staff summary of comments Dear all, As you know the public comment period on the Interim paper closed 21 April. Staff has posted a summary of the comments received 04 May (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/report-comments-cwg-uctn-interim...). Based on an initial analysis, the comments received refer to three categories: 1. The recommendations of the CWG. 2. The text of the Interim Report. 3. Proposals and rationales with respect to the use of 2- letter codes, 3-letter codes and fullnames of country and territories as TLDs. The CWG has not discussed any of the comments received to date. With respect to the draft recommendations of the CWG, based on thesummary of the comments received: There is general support for closure of the CWG and consolidation of community efforts. Further, the consolidated efforts should be part of an all-inclusive dialogue. However, how commenters see how this dialogue should be shaped is not conclusive: some comment that it should be as a formal Policy Development Process, either as a GNSO or ccNSO Policy Development Process. Others opt for a cross-community effort, and one commenter requested additional clarification. Moving forward: Staff will send out invites for 2 or 3 calls leading up to the Johannesburg ICANN meeting to work towards a final report in time for that meeting. In preparation of that meeting we suggest that staff will look at the text of the Interim report to and suggestion by commenters on the text and provide a red-line before the first call or a suggestion for rationale not to include the suggested change. Staff will also suggest a way forward with respect to the comments on the use of 2, and 3 letter codes and full andnames of countries and territories. Kind regards, Bart