IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list
Dear IGO&INGO IRT, As we were preparing to publish the policy, we needed to produce a machine-readable reserved list as mentioned in the implementation notes. In doing so, we’ve found a better approach which will make it easier for those involved in the implementation and likely reduce confusion of having two reserved lists with duplicated names. Instead of producing a separate reserved name list for the policy as we had originally planned, we’ve decided to update the existing reserved name list that is already published. In another word, update the current machine-readable list that is already being used by the registry operators. In summary, the identifiers that are in-scope of the policy will be gathered with references to the policy while the identifiers that are out-of-scope for this policy will remain with the reference to the registry agreement. Attached is a table prepared for you to see changes from the current name list to the updated list with the policy announcement. I was going to host another IRT meeting to explain this but thought perhaps it would be clear enough for you via this email. Please let me know if you have questions on this or would like an IRT meeting to discuss with the team. Otherwise, I’d appreciate your reply in support of this new approach. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org "One World, One Internet"
Hi Dennis, Thanks for sending this out. I do think this is sufficient to understand the changes taking place. Kind regards, Michael Flemming On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> wrote:
Dear IGO&INGO IRT,
As we were preparing to publish the policy, we needed to produce a machine-readable reserved list as mentioned in the implementation notes.
In doing so, we’ve found a better approach which will make it easier for those involved in the implementation and likely reduce confusion of having two reserved lists with duplicated names.
Instead of producing a separate reserved name list for the policy as we had originally planned, we’ve decided to update the existing reserved name list that is already published.
In another word, update the current machine-readable list that is already being used by the registry operators.
In summary, the identifiers that are in-scope of the policy will be gathered with references to the policy while the identifiers that are out-of-scope for this policy will remain with the reference to the registry agreement.
Attached is a table prepared for you to see changes from the current name list to the updated list with the policy announcement.
I was going to host another IRT meeting to explain this but thought perhaps it would be clear enough for you via this email.
Please let me know if you have questions on this or would like an IRT meeting to discuss with the team.
Otherwise, I’d appreciate your reply in support of this new approach.
—
Kind Regards,
Dennis S. Chang
GDD Services & Engagement Program Director
+1 213 293 7889 <(213)%20293-7889>
Skype: dennisSchang
www.icann.org "One World, One Internet"
_______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt
Dennis, I think the proposed approach makes sense. Please consider that the XML should clearly identify the registration rules for each group of labels or per label (e.g. “Consensus Policy” or “Not defined by an RFC, assigned by ICANN”), so that the registry can apply the appropriate registration validation rules (i.e. available or not available for registration). Best, -D.Tanaka From: Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com> Date: Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 9:19 PM To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org>, Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list Hi Dennis, Thanks for sending this out. I do think this is sufficient to understand the changes taking place. Kind regards, Michael Flemming On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org<mailto:dennis.chang@icann.org>> wrote: Dear IGO&INGO IRT, As we were preparing to publish the policy, we needed to produce a machine-readable reserved list as mentioned in the implementation notes. In doing so, we’ve found a better approach which will make it easier for those involved in the implementation and likely reduce confusion of having two reserved lists with duplicated names. Instead of producing a separate reserved name list for the policy as we had originally planned, we’ve decided to update the existing reserved name list that is already published. In another word, update the current machine-readable list that is already being used by the registry operators. In summary, the identifiers that are in-scope of the policy will be gathered with references to the policy while the identifiers that are out-of-scope for this policy will remain with the reference to the registry agreement. Attached is a table prepared for you to see changes from the current name list to the updated list with the policy announcement. I was going to host another IRT meeting to explain this but thought perhaps it would be clear enough for you via this email. Please let me know if you have questions on this or would like an IRT meeting to discuss with the team. Otherwise, I’d appreciate your reply in support of this new approach. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director +1 213 293 7889<tel:(213)%20293-7889> Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> "One World, One Internet" _______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt
Mr. Tanaka, Yes, the updated reserved name will clearly point to the policy as you’ve suggested. Dear IRT, (‘ve not received any requests for a meeting or further explanation from the IRT. Please reply by 18 October 2017 if you do have questions or requests. If no objection, we’ll proceed with the implementation as proposed. Hello there Ms. Ondo, This approach and information provided on the attached should answer your earlier questions: what’s changes from spec 5 reserved list? Thanks Dennis Chang From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 12:03 PM To: Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list Dennis, I think the proposed approach makes sense. Please consider that the XML should clearly identify the registration rules for each group of labels or per label (e.g. “Consensus Policy” or “Not defined by an RFC, assigned by ICANN”), so that the registry can apply the appropriate registration validation rules (i.e. available or not available for registration). Best, -D.Tanaka From: Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com> Date: Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 9:19 PM To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org>, Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list Hi Dennis, Thanks for sending this out. I do think this is sufficient to understand the changes taking place. Kind regards, Michael Flemming On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org<mailto:dennis.chang@icann.org>> wrote: Dear IGO&INGO IRT, As we were preparing to publish the policy, we needed to produce a machine-readable reserved list as mentioned in the implementation notes. In doing so, we’ve found a better approach which will make it easier for those involved in the implementation and likely reduce confusion of having two reserved lists with duplicated names. Instead of producing a separate reserved name list for the policy as we had originally planned, we’ve decided to update the existing reserved name list that is already published. In another word, update the current machine-readable list that is already being used by the registry operators. In summary, the identifiers that are in-scope of the policy will be gathered with references to the policy while the identifiers that are out-of-scope for this policy will remain with the reference to the registry agreement. Attached is a table prepared for you to see changes from the current name list to the updated list with the policy announcement. I was going to host another IRT meeting to explain this but thought perhaps it would be clear enough for you via this email. Please let me know if you have questions on this or would like an IRT meeting to discuss with the team. Otherwise, I’d appreciate your reply in support of this new approach. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director +1 213 293 7889<tel:(213)%20293-7889> Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMGaQ&c...> "One World, One Internet" _______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt
Hi Dennis,
From my POV, I see no reason to not proceed by now with the implementation as proposed.
All the best and see you all soon! / Petter -- Petter Rindforth, LL M Fenix Legal KB Stureplan 4c, 4tr 114 35 Stockholm Sweden Fax: +46(0)8-4631010 Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360 E-mail: petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu www.fenixlegal.eu NOTICE This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail. Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, www.fenixlegal.eu Thank you 16 oktober 2017 17:54:55 +02:00, skrev Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org>:
Mr. Tanaka, Yes, the updated reserved name will clearly point to the policy as you’ve suggested.
Dear IRT, (‘ve not received any requests for a meeting or further explanation from the IRT.
Please reply by 18 October 2017 if you do have questions or requests. If no objection, we’ll proceed with the implementation as proposed.
Hello there Ms. Ondo, This approach and information provided on the attached should answer your earlier questions: what’s changes from spec 5 reserved list?
Thanks Dennis Chang
From:"Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Date:Friday, October 13, 2017 at 12:03 PM To:Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc:"gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> Subject:[Ext] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list
Dennis,
I think the proposed approach makes sense. Please consider that the XML should clearly identify the registration rules for each group of labels or per label (e.g. “Consensus Policy” or “Not defined by an RFC, assigned by ICANN”), so that the registry can apply the appropriate registration validation rules (i.e. available or not available for registration).
Best, -D.Tanaka
From:Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com> Date:Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 9:19 PM To:Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc:"gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org>, Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list
Hi Dennis,
Thanks for sending this out.
I do think this is sufficient to understand the changes taking place.
Kind regards,
Michael Flemming
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Dennis Chang <<dennis.chang@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear IGO&INGO IRT,
As we were preparing to publish the policy, we needed to produce a machine-readable reserved list as mentioned in the implementation notes. In doing so, we’ve found a better approach which will make it easier for those involved in the implementation and likely reduce confusion of having two reserved lists with duplicated names.
Instead of producing a separate reserved name list for the policy as we had originally planned, we’ve decided to update the existing reserved name list that is already published. In another word, update the current machine-readable list that is already being used by the registry operators.
In summary, the identifiers that are in-scope of the policy will be gathered with references to the policy while the identifiers that are out-of-scope for this policy will remain with the reference to the registry agreement.
Attached is a table prepared for you to see changes from the current name list to the updated list with the policy announcement. I was going to host another IRT meeting to explain this but thought perhaps it would be clear enough for you via this email.
Please let me know if you have questions on this or would like an IRT meeting to discuss with the team. Otherwise, I’d appreciate your reply in support of this new approach.
—
Kind Regards,
Dennis S. Chang
GDD Services & Engagement Program Director
+1 213 293 7889 <tel:(213)%20293-7889>
Skype: dennisSchang
www.icann.org[icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMGaQ&c...> "One World, One Internet"
_______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list <Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org>
<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt>
_______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt>
Thanks IRT! In addition to the confirmation via the email group, I’ve had a call with Crystal Ondo to confirm the approach. Please note the change to the policy language that now points to the reserved name list which will be updated as previously described. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cAVS27yshnZIVrbwQQ_zFXWMnOXtcQasj4fnmPOo... We’ll present the updated file to you when ready. I’ll send a doodle poll to find an optimum time for our meeting at ICANN60 soon. We can go into further details and explanation as needed at our meeting. FYI. I will be briefing the GNSO Council on this policy implementation and other projects on Sunday 11-11:30. Thanks Dennis Chang From: Petter Rindforth <petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu> Reply-To: "petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu" <petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu> Date: Monday, October 16, 2017 at 1:16 PM To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>, Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com>, "gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] [Ext] Re: IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list Hi Dennis, From my POV, I see no reason to not proceed by now with the implementation as proposed. All the best and see you all soon! / Petter -- Petter Rindforth, LL M [cid:image001.png@01D34BE2.09A70830] Fenix Legal KB Stureplan 4c, 4tr 114 35 Stockholm Sweden Fax: +46(0)8-4631010 Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360 E-mail: petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu www.fenixlegal.eu NOTICE This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail. Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, www.fenixlegal.eu Thank you 16 oktober 2017 17:54:55 +02:00, skrev Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org>: Mr. Tanaka, Yes, the updated reserved name will clearly point to the policy as you’ve suggested. Dear IRT, (‘ve not received any requests for a meeting or further explanation from the IRT. Please reply by 18 October 2017 if you do have questions or requests. If no objection, we’ll proceed with the implementation as proposed. Hello there Ms. Ondo, This approach and information provided on the attached should answer your earlier questions: what’s changes from spec 5 reserved list? Thanks Dennis Chang From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 12:03 PM To: Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list Dennis, I think the proposed approach makes sense. Please consider that the XML should clearly identify the registration rules for each group of labels or per label (e.g. “Consensus Policy” or “Not defined by an RFC, assigned by ICANN”), so that the registry can apply the appropriate registration validation rules (i.e. available or not available for registration). Best, -D.Tanaka From: Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com> Date: Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 9:19 PM To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org>, Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list Hi Dennis, Thanks for sending this out. I do think this is sufficient to understand the changes taking place. Kind regards, Michael Flemming On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org<mailto:dennis.chang@icann.org>> wrote: Dear IGO&INGO IRT, As we were preparing to publish the policy, we needed to produce a machine-readable reserved list as mentioned in the implementation notes. In doing so, we’ve found a better approach which will make it easier for those involved in the implementation and likely reduce confusion of having two reserved lists with duplicated names. Instead of producing a separate reserved name list for the policy as we had originally planned, we’ve decided to update the existing reserved name list that is already published. In another word, update the current machine-readable list that is already being used by the registry operators. In summary, the identifiers that are in-scope of the policy will be gathered with references to the policy while the identifiers that are out-of-scope for this policy will remain with the reference to the registry agreement. Attached is a table prepared for you to see changes from the current name list to the updated list with the policy announcement. I was going to host another IRT meeting to explain this but thought perhaps it would be clear enough for you via this email. Please let me know if you have questions on this or would like an IRT meeting to discuss with the team. Otherwise, I’d appreciate your reply in support of this new approach. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director +1 213 293 7889<tel:(213)%20293-7889> Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMGaQ&c...> "One World, One Internet" _______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt _______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt
See you on Sunday! (I'll be there as a supporting part of the public) Best, Petter -- Petter Rindforth, LL M Fenix Legal KB Stureplan 4c, 4tr 114 35 Stockholm Sweden Fax: +46(0)8-4631010 Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360 E-mail: petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu www.fenixlegal.eu NOTICE This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail. Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, www.fenixlegal.eu Thank you 23 oktober 2017 18:33:53 +02:00, skrev Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org>:
Thanks IRT!
In addition to the confirmation via the email group, I’ve had a call with Crystal Ondo to confirm the approach. Please note the change to the policy language that now points to the reserved name list which will be updated as previously described. <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cAVS27yshnZIVrbwQQ_zFXWMnOXtcQasj4fnmPOo...> We’ll present the updated file to you when ready.
I’ll send a doodle poll to find an optimum time for our meeting at ICANN60 soon. We can go into further details and explanation as needed at our meeting. FYI. I will be briefing the GNSO Council on this policy implementation and other projects on Sunday 11-11:30.
Thanks Dennis Chang
From:Petter Rindforth <petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu> Reply-To:"petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu" <petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu> Date:Monday, October 16, 2017 at 1:16 PM To:Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc:"Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>, Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com>, "gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> Subject:Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] [Ext] Re: IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list
Hi Dennis,
From my POV, I see no reason to not proceed by now with the implementation as proposed.
All the best and see you all soon!
/ Petter
--
Petter Rindforth, LL M
Fenix Legal KB
Stureplan 4c, 4tr
114 35 Stockholm
Sweden
Fax: +46(0)8-4631010
Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360
E-mail: petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu
www.fenixlegal.eu
NOTICE
This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail.
Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, www.fenixlegal.eu
Thank you
16 oktober 2017 17:54:55 +02:00, skrev Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org>:
Mr. Tanaka, Yes, the updated reserved name will clearly point to the policy as you’ve suggested.
Dear IRT, (‘ve not received any requests for a meeting or further explanation from the IRT.
Please reply by 18 October 2017 if you do have questions or requests. If no objection, we’ll proceed with the implementation as proposed.
Hello there Ms. Ondo, This approach and information provided on the attached should answer your earlier questions: what’s changes from spec 5 reserved list?
Thanks Dennis Chang
From:"Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>Date:Friday, October 13, 2017 at 12:03 PM To:Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc:"gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> Subject:[Ext] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list
Dennis,
I think the proposed approach makes sense. Please consider that the XML should clearly identify the registration rules for each group of labels or per label (e.g. “Consensus Policy” or “Not defined by an RFC, assigned by ICANN”), so that the registry can apply the appropriate registration validation rules (i.e. available or not available for registration).
Best, -D.Tanaka
From:Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com>Date:Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 9:19 PM To:Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc:"gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org>, Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] IGO&INGO Policy Implementation: Reserved name list - a new approach: update existing list
Hi Dennis,
Thanks for sending this out.
I do think this is sufficient to understand the changes taking place.
Kind regards,
Michael Flemming
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Dennis Chang <<dennis.chang@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear IGO&INGO IRT,
As we were preparing to publish the policy, we needed to produce a machine-readable reserved list as mentioned in the implementation notes. In doing so, we’ve found a better approach which will make it easier for those involved in the implementation and likely reduce confusion of having two reserved lists with duplicated names.
Instead of producing a separate reserved name list for the policy as we had originally planned, we’ve decided to update the existing reserved name list that is already published. In another word, update the current machine-readable list that is already being used by the registry operators.
In summary, the identifiers that are in-scope of the policy will be gathered with references to the policy while the identifiers that are out-of-scope for this policy will remain with the reference to the registry agreement.
Attached is a table prepared for you to see changes from the current name list to the updated list with the policy announcement. I was going to host another IRT meeting to explain this but thought perhaps it would be clear enough for you via this email.
Please let me know if you have questions on this or would like an IRT meeting to discuss with the team. Otherwise, I’d appreciate your reply in support of this new approach.
—
Kind Regards,
Dennis S. Chang
GDD Services & Engagement Program Director
+1 213 293 7889 <tel:(213)%20293-7889>
Skype: dennisSchang
www.icann.org[icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMGaQ&c...> "One World, One Internet"
_______________________________________________
Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list
<Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org>
<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt>
_______________________________________________
Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt mailing list
Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org
<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt>
participants (4)
-
Dennis Chang -
Michael Flemming -
Petter Rindforth -
Tan Tanaka, Dennis