- Gnso-epdp-team - lists.icann.org

GAC Concerns with feasibility of timeline v. COVID-19
by Manal Ismail April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

Dear EPDP Team, In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its drastic consequences on governments, organizations, private sector and individuals worldwide, I would like to express our serious concerns, as GAC leaders, that maintaining the current pace of work towards completion of Phase 2 by mid-June could jeopardize the delivery, efficacy and legitimacy of the EPDP's policy recommendations. While recognizing that the GAC has continually advised for swiftly completing policy development and implementing agreed policy on this critical public policy matter, we believe that given the current global health emergency, which puts many in the EPDP and the community under unprecedented stress (for example governments has been called to heightened duties for the continuity of essential public services), pressing important deliberations and decisions in such a short time frame on already strained participants would mean unacceptably sacrificing the product for the timeline. We understand there are budget and human resources considerations involved in the completion of Phase 2 of the EPDP. However, we are all living through a global health pandemic, so we call on the EPDP Team to seriously reassess its course and expectations (be it on the duration of its calls, the turn-around time of reviews, its ultimate timeline and budget) emulating what numerous governments, global organizations, and households are doing to adapt during these challenging times across the world. Sincerely Manal Ismail, GAC Chair on the behalf of the entire GAC Leadership

1 1

Recommendation 1 - discussion items
by Caitlin Tubergen April 8, 2020

April 8, 2020

Dear EPDP Team: In preparation for the EPDP meeting tomorrow, the Staff Support Team has prepared the attached document, which highlights the Rec. 1 issues for discussion during tomorrow’s call. The document includes questions for your consideration. Please note the document only highlights issues flagged by Tuesday’s deadline. Please feel free to flag any items we may have inadvertently missed. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin

1 0

Rec 2
by King, Brian April 8, 2020

April 8, 2020

Hi Team, Since a) it looks like we'll have our hands full with Rec 1 tomorrow, b) there is some overlap with the concerns submitted regarding Rec 2, and c) no groups have had an opportunity to do Rec 2 homework, I'd like to request that we plan to defer Rec 2 review to next week. It would also be extremely helpful and appreciated, and would speed up our Rec 2 review, if Staff had capacity to help fill in any identical items in Rec 2 that we can successfully dispose of in Rec 1 tomorrow (to the extent they do not pertain to governments specifically). Thanks. Brian J. King Director of Internet Policy and Industry Affairs T +1 443 761 3726 markmonitor.com<http://www.markmonitor.com> MarkMonitor Protecting companies and consumers in a digital world

1 0

**Reminder** Meeting Invitation / Observers / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP-P2 call / Thursday, 09 April 2020
by Julie Bisland April 8, 2020

April 8, 2020

**See April webinar zoom URL link below. As a result of various requests to facilitate observers to follow the EPDP Phase 2 deliberations in real time, zoom webinar room will be made available for the EPDP plenary meetings. As a reminder, the zoom recording, audio recording, chat transcript and transcript of the EPDP plenary meetings will be publicly posted as soon as available on the EPDP wiki page and GNSO master calendar. Dear all, The next meeting of the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 is scheduled on Thursday, 09 April 2020 at 14:00 UTC for 3 hours. (note duration change) For other times: https://tinyurl.com/stkkpv5 [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_stkkpv5&d=…> Agenda Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/ziqJBw The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> **Updated information** April observer zoom webinar room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/731687691 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.zoom.us_j_731687…> Going forward, observers will now join via zoom webinar room vs audio cast. Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands. One tap mobile US: +16699006833,,731687691# or +13462487799,,731687691# Webinar ID: 731 687 691 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acwzlz1QoY [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.zoom.us_u_acwzlz…> Kind Regards, Terri

1 0

Proposed agenda - EPDP Team Meeting #52 - 9 April 2020
by Caitlin Tubergen April 6, 2020

April 6, 2020

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next EPDP Team meeting on Thursday, 9 April at 14:00 UTC. Additionally, please find attached the proposed timeline for review. As a reminder: Public comment review It is the responsibility of all EPDP Members to read the Public Comment Review Tools (PCRT) in their entirety to ensure all comments are considered. The discussion tables are a tool to aid the Team’s review, but are not meant to replace the PCRTs. As the Team reads through the PCRTs, please consider: Based on the comments / concerns flagged, what changes should be considered to this specific section? Following the group’s review of the PCRTs, please provide input on what changes should be considered (if any) in the discussion table google docs using suggestion mode. Recommendation 9 – SLAs: Support Staff to consider the discussion for Priority 1 and Priority 2 requests and formulate an update, considering the Team’s discussion by Thursday, 7 April. Mark Sv. to review Priority 3 concerns and propose an update, factoring in today’s discussion, by Thursday, 7 April. Mark Sv. and Volker to review the clarifications in the Recommendation 9 Discussion table and provide additional guidance by Thursday, 7 April. EPDP Team to review the remaining items in the Recommendation 9 Discussion table, e.g., Mean Response Times and Review of Targets and provide feedback into the Discussion Table by Thursday, 7 April. Recommendation 1 - Accreditation – all groups to review the PCRT, considering what changes should be made based on comments received, and input suggestions into the Discussion Table, by COB Tuesday, 7 April. Recommendation 2 – Accreditation of Governmental Entities – GAC representatives to review the PCRT, considering what changes should be made based on comments received, and input suggestions into the Discussion Table by COB Tuesday, 7 April. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- EPDP Phase 2 - Meeting #52 Proposed Agenda Thursday 9 April 2020 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Confirmation of agenda (Chair) 3. Welcome and housekeeping issues (Chair) (10 minutes) Status of PCRT & Discussion Tables + deadlines & proposed timeline (see proposed timetable and https://community.icann.org/x/Hi6JBw) 4. Recommendation #1 - Accreditation (90 minutes) Concerns flagged in EPDP Team review of recommendation #1 discussion table EPDP Team to discuss how to address concerns Confirm next steps 5. Recommendation #2 – Accreditation of Governmental entities (60 minutes) Overview / run through of and recommendation #2 discussion table EPDP Team to discuss how to address concerns Confirm next steps 6. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): Thursday 9 April at 14.00 UTC. Topic to be addressed: Request Criteria & Content, Response Requirements, Acknowledgement of Receipt Confirm action items Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

At-Large Important Webinar Invitation | 2020 - First Capacity Building Webinar | Monday 6 April at 20:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine April 6, 2020

April 6, 2020

Español después de la version en inglés Version francaise en bas du mail Dear All, On behalf of Joanna Kulesza and Alfredo Calderon, Co-Chairs of the Capacity Building Working Group, we would like to invite you to join the first webinar of the NEW At-Large Capacity Building Program – 2020<https://community.icann.org/x/1Ic3Ag> on the Topic of Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team – Phase 2. The Webinar will review: * the background and rationale for the EPDP; * privacy legislation and the outcomes of the EPDP's Phase 1; * the concept of the Standardized System for Access and Disclosure (SSAD); * the proposal for SSAD; * open issues. Following the presentation, there will be an opportunity for Q&A. The trainers will be Hadia El Miniawi<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Hadia+Elminiawi+SOI> and Alan Greenberg<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Alan+Greenberg+SOI>. The webinar is scheduled on Monday 6 April 2020 at 20:00 UTC for 90 minutes. For other times: https://tinyurl.com/u294dnd [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_u294dnd&d=…> The draft agenda and call details are available at https://community.icann.org/x/sDGJBw French and Spanish interpretation will be provided. Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/674955048?pwd=b3AzU2xYaFBBSkVZRlR3RzlnNmZzQT09 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.zoom.us_j_674955…> / Meeting ID: 674 955 048 Passcode: 123456 Conference ID’s: EN: 1638 ES: 1738 FR: 1838 If you require a dial-out, please contact At-Large Staff at staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> with your preferred number. Thank you. Kind regards, At-Large Staff ********************* Estimados todos, En nombre de Joanna Kulesza y Alfredo Calderón, co-Presidentes del grupo de trabajo de creación de capacidades, nos gustaría invitarlos a unirse al primer seminario web del NUEVO Programa de creación de capacidad At-Large - 2020<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Capacity+Building+Work…> sobre el tema del Proceso acelerado de desarrollo de políticas ( EPDP) sobre la Especificación Temporal para el equipo de datos de registro de gTLD - Fase 2. El seminario web revisará: • los antecedentes y la justificación del EPDP; • legislación de privacidad y los resultados de la Fase 1 del EPDP; • el concepto del Sistema Estandarizado de Acceso y Divulgación (SSAD); • la propuesta de SSAD; • problemas abiertos. Después de la presentación, habrá una oportunidad para hacer preguntas y respuestas. Los entrenadores serán Hadia El Miniawi<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Hadia+Elminiawi+SOI> y Alan Greenberg.<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Alan+Greenberg+SOI> El seminario web está programado para el Lunes 6 de abril de 2020 a las 20:00 UTC durante 90 minutos. Para horas en su localidad: https://tinyurl.com/u294dnd [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_u294dnd&d=…> [tinyurl.com] El borrador de la Agenda y los detalles de la llamada están disponibles en https://community.icann.org/x/sDGJBw Se proporcionará interpretación en Francés y Español. Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/674955048?pwd=b3AzU2xYaFBBSkVZRlR3RzlnNmZzQT09 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.zoom.us_j_674955…> / Reunion ID: 674 955 048 Passcode: 123456 Conference ID’s: EN: 1638 ES: 1738 FR: 1838 Si necesita un a dial-out, po favor contactar At-Large Staff at staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> con su numero de telefono. !Muchas gracias! Saludos cordiales, At-Large Staff ******************** Chers Tous, Au nom de Joanna Kulesza et Alfredo Calederon, copresidents du groupe de traval sur le rencorcement des capacités<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Capacity+Building+Work…>, nous aimerions vous inviter à participer au premier webinaire du nouveau programme de renforcement des capacités At-Large 2020 sur le theme du processus accélélré d’élaboration des politiques (EPDP) sur la specification temporaire pour les données d’enregistrement des gTLD - phase 2. Le webinaire examinera: * le context et la justification de l’EPDP; * legislation sur la vie privée et résultats de la phase 1 de l’EPDP; * le concept su Système normalise d’accès et de divulgation (SSAD); * la proposition de SSAD; * questions ouvertes Après la présentation il y aura une opportunité de Questions et Réponses. Les présentateurs seront Hadia El Miniawi<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Hadia+Elminiawi+SOI> et Alan Greenberg<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Alan+Greenberg+SOI>. Le webinaire est programme le lundi 6 Avril 2020 de 20:00 UTC à 21:30 UTC. Pour d’autres horaires: https://tinyurl.com/u294dnd [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_u294dnd&d=…> L’ordre du jour et les details de l’appel sont disponibles à https://community.icann.org/x/sDGJBw Le webinaire sera interprété en francais et espagnol. Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/674955048?pwd=b3AzU2xYaFBBSkVZRlR3RzlnNmZzQT09 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.zoom.us_j_674955…> / Meeting ID: 674 955 048 Mot de passe: 123456 Codes ADIGO: EN: 1638 ES: 1738 FR: 1838 Si vous avez besoin que l’opératrice ADIGO vous appelle, merci de nous (staff(a)atlarge.icann.org)<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org)> confirmer votre numéro d’appel par retour d’email. Merci. Cordialement, Personnel At-Large 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

Notes and action items - EPDP Phase 2 Meeting #51
by Caitlin Tubergen April 2, 2020

April 2, 2020

Dear All, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s EPDP Team meeting. As a reminder, the next meeting will be Thursday, 9 April at 14:00 UTC for three hours. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin High-level Notes and Action Items Public comment review It is the responsibility of all EPDP Members to read the Public Comment Review Tools (PCRT) in their entirety to ensure all comments are considered. The discussion tables are a tool to aid the Team’s review, but are not meant to replace the PCRTs. As the Team reads through the PCRTs, please consider: Based on the comments / concerns flagged, what changes should be considered to this specific section? Following the group’s review of the PCRTs, please provide input on what changes should be considered (if any) in the discussion table google docs using suggestion mode. Recommendation 9 – SLAs: Support Staff to consider the discussion for Priority 1 and Priority 2 requests and formulate an update, considering the Team’s discussion by Thursday, 7 April. Mark Sv. to review Priority 3 concerns and propose an update, factoring in today’s discussion, by Thursday, 7 April. Mark Sv. and Volker to review the clarifications in the Recommendation 9 Discussion table and provide additional guidance by Thursday, 7 April. EPDP Team to review the remaining items in the Recommendation 9 Discussion table, e.g., Mean Response Times and Review of Targets and provide feedback into the Discussion Table by Thursday, 7 April. Recommendation 1 - Accreditation – all groups to review the PCRT, considering what changes should be made based on comments received, and input suggestions into the Discussion Table, by COB Tuesday, 7 April. Recommendation 2 – Accreditation of Governmental Entities – GAC representatives to review the PCRT, considering what changes should be made based on comments received, and input suggestions into the Discussion Table by COB Tuesday, 7 April. EPDP Phase 2 - Meeting #51 Proposed Agenda Thursday 2 April 2020 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Confirmation of agenda (Chair) 3. Welcome and housekeeping issues (Chair) (5 minutes) 4. Recommendation #9 - Determining Variable SLAs for response times for SSAD (45 minutes) Consider EPDP Team Input on Discussion Table Urgent Requests Concern a has already been discussed at length Threshold question: if several groups have already expressed the concern, does that mean that it cannot be changed? Answer: Focus should be on new information that would change the group's view - has anyone changed their opinion as a result of the input provided? Concern b – observe if we decide to go down this path, but not advocating that we do, we should be mindful that law enforcement is typically acting under an expedited scenario. Concern e – business days being calculated by the CP would result in a fragmented system. Concern a - Believe we did provide comments that were not discussed. For urgent requests, these do not stop on the weekend. Bodily injury does not take a break over the weekend. Concern about the review process – we may not be working from the same assumptions Disagree that the purpose of comments is to find out if critical mass should change the recommendations. Comments are used to solicit input, perspectives, and data that was not available to the working group during its deliberations. What we are looking for here: something we have not seen before or heard before Issues with respect to the priority and who sets the priority – this is very unclear. How can this be resolved? This is a hard question b/c we are up against a tough deadline. In the age of COVID-19, cybercriminals have used this pandemic to abuse the DNS. Two days has not been an acceptable time – this needs to be changed When comments come in, you have to look at them and think about them. There may be situations where public comments can and should influence the team to change its mind Concern b – this should be assessed and standardized by the central gateway General point on urgent requests and timing – if fast SLAs are a challenge, that is all the more reasoning to have centralization and automation A number of comments have indicated concern with 1 business day, others have concern with how an urgent request can be confirmed as truly urgent - how can those two concerns be brought together and addressed through updates to the recommendation. There needs to be a common body – the CGM where there is a standardized definition of what urgent will be – there needs to be a centralized decider Priority 2 These should be automated, and two business days is not automated With regard to a, no opinion at this time. C – do not agree with this – this is an implementation issue E – do not think this is relevant G – this only applies to providers, not complainants H – this should be handled by the IRT Concern c – regarding automation from Day 1 – the capability of automation is one thing, and having a policy that requires automation is different It will be hard to provide deadlines in the final report If there are specific deadlines, this will be problematic – need a gradient that takes into account the various factors that are in play 6(1)(b) may not be relevant – encourage the team to read through these guidelines: https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/smernice/guidelines-220… - paragraphs 27 - 34 There is a policy decision to automate these types of requests – is the team now rethinking this? All policies of ICANN are still under the requirements with local laws that we also have to follow – still need to go through a balancing test, depending on who the UDRP is filed by Might recommend that the GNSO Council could send this to the RPMs PDP Bewildered by this conversation, since the Team agreed to automate these in the automation section of the report – if there are legal concerns, we have asked a question to outside counsel, so maybe we should wait for the legal advice to help inform our decision When you start talking about categories of requests – people are underestimating the broad range of quality within a request – some of the requests, even if nominally fitting into a category, are not legal We do not know as to when the timing starts – just b/c an automated review says that box A-D are complete, does not mean that is a complete request – it will still need to be looked at. Running of the SLAs is already problematic. Feedback from EPDP Team Confirm next steps Priority 3 First three points – very clear position of no – that is not what is discussed and agreed to – the tech-related comments – we are still dealing with registration data. If there is higher fraud on the weekend, knowing the registration data will not completely eliminate the fraud Do not agree with G – this is not an error. F – agree with this comment – if a request in a language the registrar does not support, this is a concern – this should be addressed in the IRT. In reference to longer term research, the team has not had enough time to debate the research. Concerns C & D – raise a good point about requests that do not fall into the urgent category but should still have a higher priority – phishing, malware, fraud – consumer protection related to the DNS. Proposal – create a separate category that prioritized phishing, malware, and fraud above the 5-day SLA response time The numbers are more or less arbitrary – there is one year before any of this goes into effect – we have more time to determine what the numbers will be. That should be kept in mind when this is reviewed. The reason we’re talking about a hybrid model and not a centralized model – since we received that letter, the Belgian DPA clarified its preference for a centralized decision maker – invite CPH colleagues to rejoin this conversation – if the CP is not making the decisions, it doesn’t need to worry about the SLA. A longer number of days will not work for the entities that need to process this data. A very substantial part of the EPDP team does not and will not support a centralized model. In concern d, no one thinks that any major category of request will be priority 3 – everyone wants priority 1 and wants data immediately if they can get it – that is not viable. Most WHOIS queries will be Priority 3 – if we keep things that way, Priority 3 will be responded to relatively quickly There is always a concern that everything will become Priority 1 and Priority 3 will become an empty set – reading the public comments does not mean that everything should be priority 1, it just means that the proposed SLA is too long. 5. Recommendation #1 - Accreditation & Recommendation #2 – Accreditation of Governmental entities (30 minutes) Overview / run through of recommendation #1 discussion table and recommendation #2 discussion table Feedback from EPDP Team Confirm next steps Recommendation 1 - Accreditation – all groups to review the PCRT, considering what changes should be made based on comments received, and input suggestions into the Discussion Table, by COB Tuesday, 7 April. Recommendation 2 – Accreditation of Governmental Entities – GAC representatives to review the PCRT, considering what changes should be made based on comments received, and input suggestions into the Discussion Table by COB Tuesday, 7 April. 6. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): Thursday 9 April at 14.00 UTC. Topic to be addressed: Accreditation Confirm action items Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

Meeting Invitation / Observers / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP-P2 call / Thursday, 09 April 2020
by Terri Agnew April 2, 2020

April 2, 2020

**See April webinar zoom URL link below. As a result of various requests to facilitate observers to follow the EPDP Phase 2 deliberations in real time, zoom webinar room will be made available for the EPDP plenary meetings. As a reminder, the zoom recording, audio recording, chat transcript and transcript of the EPDP plenary meetings will be publicly posted as soon as available on the EPDP wiki page and GNSO master calendar. Dear all, The next meeting of the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 is scheduled on Thursday, 09 April 2020 at 14:00 UTC for 3 hours. (note duration change) For other times: https://tinyurl.com/stkkpv5 Agenda Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/ziqJBw The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> **Updated information** April observer zoom webinar room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/731687691 Going forward, observers will now join via zoom webinar room vs audio cast. Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands. One tap mobile US: +16699006833,,731687691# or +13462487799,,731687691# Webinar ID: 731 687 691 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acwzlz1QoY Kind Regards, Terri

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 | Thursday, 02 April 2020 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew April 2, 2020

April 2, 2020

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2 held on Thursday, 02 April 2020 at 14:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/yyqJBw> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members and alternates can join the call as panelist, observers can join as an attendee to listen. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/IYEpBQ>. Thank you. With kind regards, Terri

1 0

EPDP Project Package - 31 Mar. 2020
by policy＠bacinblack.com April 2, 2020

April 2, 2020

Dear All, Please find attached the EPDP-Phase 2 Project package that closes out March of 2020. The project health remains on a "Revised Schedule" and "On-Target". The percent complete reports at 92% with an 81% elapsed time from when the project started. This is up 11% from last period due to the close of the public comment period, close out of tasks related to Priority 2 items and completion of staff related tasks. Do not let the 8% remaining fool you. We have a fair amount of comments to review, review comments from the Addendum report, form final agreements on proposed recommendations, perform a consensus call, and review the text of the Final Report. You can find separated work products on the wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/6BdIBg Thank you. Berry Cobb @berrycobb GNSO Policy Consultant

1 0