FW: IGO Policy Implementation status brief to GNSO: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call
Dear IGO&INGO IRT, FYI, I’ve replied to a follow up email from James, GNSO Council. Nothing new for you here but I wanted to ensure that IRT is in the loop. Thanks Dennis Chang From: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 12:56 AM To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <donna.austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: IGO Policy Implementation status brief to GNSO: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear James, I am in route to Abu Dhabi and caught your email fortunately and I hope this reply will be helpful. I would not characterize it as receiving a “green light” from RySG. The fact is that we did not receive any reply from the RySG yet; so, no light of any color. Stéphane Van Gelder, co-chair, replied at first that the group is working to coalesce around a response and requested more time; then wrote again with the following. “Although members did voice appreciation that ICANN staff reached out to the SG in this proactive fashion to determine our level of support for the proposal as drafted in your letter, the SG as a whole has not ratified a formal position of support. As such, I am loath to try and sum up an SG position for you, beyond the aforementioned appreciation for the way staff have handled this and also, I think it's fair to say, a feeling that the proposal itself is a good faith attempt at taking registry views and realities into account. I have copied the SG on this response so that any individual registry wishing to liaise with you further on this matter can do so.” Upon discussion with the IRT, we’ve decided to proceed with the implementation based on: 1. No objections are received to date 2. Those registries that inquired individually had no objections and confirmed that the approach was reasonable and implementable 3. IRT supported proceeding with the approach including those that are registries 4. There did not seem to be an expected timeline for an official reply and it did not seem appropriate for us to press for a reply and continue to wait I plan to be at the GSNO meeting on Sunday from 11 – 11:30 to brief you on the policy implementation and will be happy to provide further details. Thanks Dennis Chang From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com> Date: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 11:06 AM To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org>, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <donna.austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: IGO Policy Implementation status brief to GNSO: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear Dennis – Many thanks for this comprehensive update. For clarity on one point: While you still haven’t received a response from the RySG on your letter, you do have a green light from their leadership to proceed with the dual-approach (reserved and claims) plan? Thanks in advance for your response, and safe travels to Abu Dhabi. See you there. Thank you, J. ------------------ James Bladel GNSO Chair From: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 11:40 To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <donna.austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb Mail <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: IGO Policy Implementation status brief to GNSO: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear GNSO Council, As suggested by James, I am providing you a written report of the status on the IGO/INGO Policy Implementation in lieu of a meeting prior to the ICANN60. Since our last meeting, the following was reported on 10 October 2017 version of the GNSO Project List: “The proposed implementation of GNSO Consensus Policy Recommendation for the Protection of IGO&INGO Identifier in All gTLDs[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2D...> was posted for public comment and the summary and analysis report completed. The implementation team is in the process of finalizing the policy document based on the recommendations received in the public comment in collaborations with the IRT.” Specifically, we had been working to resolve conflicting requests from registries. While some registries were requesting short implementation time frame, others asked for much longer duration. Upon research, we had learned that those requesting quick implementation were interested in taking advantage of the exceptions procedure to register reserved names which this policy allows and those who were asking for longer time were concerned about the INGO claims system development. The implementation team devised a plan where we could satisfy both needs by offering two effective dates: one for reserved names and another for claims. This plan was shared with the RySG via a letter[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. While RySG has not responded formally, we received a reply from the vice-chair to let us know that there had not been objections voiced to our proposed plan. He also asked the registries to reach out to us individually with their questions and suggestions. As a result, we had additional opportunity to discuss the implementation and further develop it to make it easier to implement with less confusion. Our updated plan calls for an update to the existing reserved name list which avoids duplication of names and potential confusion on which names qualify for the exceptional procedure for registration. This approach has been well received by the IRT. You can view a summary of how these lists will be affected by this policy here[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. Currently, the final draft is under review by IRT and we plan to move toward publication with the support of the IRT. While, no IRT session has been scheduled at ICANN60, we may be gathering to take advantage being able to meet in-person. The challenge with this policy implementation is that of scope confusion and we appreciate the close working relationship with the IRT. It’s our aim to keep us together on the same page throughout this implementation. The implementation process also includes collaboration with the IRT such as the creation and release of the INGO Claims system specification. At the moment, I have no request to the GNSO Council. While small in number, the IRT has been responsive and engaged. One good news is that Mr. Dennis Tanaka from Verisign has just joined us as an IRT member. He has been tracking our work having taken over from Chuck Gomes. Please express your appreciation for Mr. Tanaka’s contribution when you get a chance. You’ll note that I will refer to him as Mr. Tanaka to avoid confusion with me. Thank you for the opportunity to brief the council and please don’t hesitate to contact me or the IRT for anything further. I look forward to seeing you all at Abu Dhabi. Safe travel. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org "One World, One Internet" From: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Date: Monday, October 16, 2017 at 9:34 AM To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Unless I hear otherwise, I’ll provide a written report in the next day or so. Thanks Dennis Chang From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com> Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 9:46 AM To: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Nathalie – As we’ve been discussing in the other thread, let’s consider moving this to a written report (given the lack of availability of folks next week). Any objections? Thanks— J. From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org> Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 10:36 To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb Mail <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear all, I apologise, the Doodle responses to this poll for the call on Monday got wiped – I am at a loss how – and I didn’t have time to view which was the preferred slot. Would you please be so kind as to re-enter your choices in this new poll and I will send the invites out shortly. https://doodle.com/poll/gwi5ads2ssnzu4tx[doodle.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__doodle.com_poll_gwi5ads2ssnzu4tx&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=dqLP1wJqBvDSYLKrSEaAkCi_Kv0Mk5D_d32n29DHCN8&m=KHi7QlfSUZr-B166IyfLeYMXzZ1NIhB-sjHs3zJ4gg0&s=h-mrWVibTM-dd6EQw8NRGK7dVqp49GM7FSIlJQVVPZI&e=> Thank you, Nathalie From: <gnso-secs-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 5:44 PM To: James Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-secs] Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear all, In order to schedule a discussion next week, similar to the one held prior to ICANN59, between the GNSO Council chairs, the IGO IRT – GNSO Council liaison and staff support, please be so kind as to complete the below Doodle poll: https://icannorg.doodle.com/poll/hfmhci7r6w54qxa4[icannorg.doodle.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icannorg.doodle.com_poll_hfmhci7r6w54qxa4&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3mMOeqECqeCGNhT56kej4tHm0qNqRHhz7DwgHfPlPzo&s=Apis2IV1SNIvgQKf8VLIeBsTH-b9jNRkMBTmk2wsEQ8&e=> Thank you! Kind regards, Nathalie Nathalie Peregrine Manager, Operations Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine@icann.org <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org%20> Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<applewebdata://EB3A6F47-9760-400D-A39B-A7EFFC56B467/learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>
Thank you, Dennis. Appreciate the update. Best, -D.Tanaka From: <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Date: Friday, October 27, 2017 at 3:37 AM To: "gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org" <gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt@icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Gnso-igo-ingo-ip-irt] FW: IGO Policy Implementation status brief to GNSO: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear IGO&INGO IRT, FYI, I’ve replied to a follow up email from James, GNSO Council. Nothing new for you here but I wanted to ensure that IRT is in the loop. Thanks Dennis Chang From: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 12:56 AM To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <donna.austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: IGO Policy Implementation status brief to GNSO: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear James, I am in route to Abu Dhabi and caught your email fortunately and I hope this reply will be helpful. I would not characterize it as receiving a “green light” from RySG. The fact is that we did not receive any reply from the RySG yet; so, no light of any color. Stéphane Van Gelder, co-chair, replied at first that the group is working to coalesce around a response and requested more time; then wrote again with the following. “Although members did voice appreciation that ICANN staff reached out to the SG in this proactive fashion to determine our level of support for the proposal as drafted in your letter, the SG as a whole has not ratified a formal position of support. As such, I am loath to try and sum up an SG position for you, beyond the aforementioned appreciation for the way staff have handled this and also, I think it's fair to say, a feeling that the proposal itself is a good faith attempt at taking registry views and realities into account. I have copied the SG on this response so that any individual registry wishing to liaise with you further on this matter can do so.” Upon discussion with the IRT, we’ve decided to proceed with the implementation based on: 1. No objections are received to date 2. Those registries that inquired individually had no objections and confirmed that the approach was reasonable and implementable 3. IRT supported proceeding with the approach including those that are registries 4. There did not seem to be an expected timeline for an official reply and it did not seem appropriate for us to press for a reply and continue to wait I plan to be at the GSNO meeting on Sunday from 11 – 11:30 to brief you on the policy implementation and will be happy to provide further details. Thanks Dennis Chang From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com> Date: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 11:06 AM To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org>, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <donna.austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: IGO Policy Implementation status brief to GNSO: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear Dennis – Many thanks for this comprehensive update. For clarity on one point: While you still haven’t received a response from the RySG on your letter, you do have a green light from their leadership to proceed with the dual-approach (reserved and claims) plan? Thanks in advance for your response, and safe travels to Abu Dhabi. See you there. Thank you, J. ------------------ James Bladel GNSO Chair From: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 11:40 To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <donna.austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb Mail <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: IGO Policy Implementation status brief to GNSO: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear GNSO Council, As suggested by James, I am providing you a written report of the status on the IGO/INGO Policy Implementation in lieu of a meeting prior to the ICANN60. Since our last meeting, the following was reported on 10 October 2017 version of the GNSO Project List: “The proposed implementation of GNSO Consensus Policy Recommendation for the Protection of IGO&INGO Identifier in All gTLDs[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2D...> was posted for public comment and the summary and analysis report completed. The implementation team is in the process of finalizing the policy document based on the recommendations received in the public comment in collaborations with the IRT.” Specifically, we had been working to resolve conflicting requests from registries. While some registries were requesting short implementation time frame, others asked for much longer duration. Upon research, we had learned that those requesting quick implementation were interested in taking advantage of the exceptions procedure to register reserved names which this policy allows and those who were asking for longer time were concerned about the INGO claims system development. The implementation team devised a plan where we could satisfy both needs by offering two effective dates: one for reserved names and another for claims. This plan was shared with the RySG via a letter[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. While RySG has not responded formally, we received a reply from the vice-chair to let us know that there had not been objections voiced to our proposed plan. He also asked the registries to reach out to us individually with their questions and suggestions. As a result, we had additional opportunity to discuss the implementation and further develop it to make it easier to implement with less confusion. Our updated plan calls for an update to the existing reserved name list which avoids duplication of names and potential confusion on which names qualify for the exceptional procedure for registration. This approach has been well received by the IRT. You can view a summary of how these lists will be affected by this policy here[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. Currently, the final draft is under review by IRT and we plan to move toward publication with the support of the IRT. While, no IRT session has been scheduled at ICANN60, we may be gathering to take advantage being able to meet in-person. The challenge with this policy implementation is that of scope confusion and we appreciate the close working relationship with the IRT. It’s our aim to keep us together on the same page throughout this implementation. The implementation process also includes collaboration with the IRT such as the creation and release of the INGO Claims system specification. At the moment, I have no request to the GNSO Council. While small in number, the IRT has been responsive and engaged. One good news is that Mr. Dennis Tanaka from Verisign has just joined us as an IRT member. He has been tracking our work having taken over from Chuck Gomes. Please express your appreciation for Mr. Tanaka’s contribution when you get a chance. You’ll note that I will refer to him as Mr. Tanaka to avoid confusion with me. Thank you for the opportunity to brief the council and please don’t hesitate to contact me or the IRT for anything further. I look forward to seeing you all at Abu Dhabi. Safe travel. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org "One World, One Internet" From: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Date: Monday, October 16, 2017 at 9:34 AM To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Unless I hear otherwise, I’ll provide a written report in the next day or so. Thanks Dennis Chang From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com> Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 9:46 AM To: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Nathalie – As we’ve been discussing in the other thread, let’s consider moving this to a written report (given the lack of availability of folks next week). Any objections? Thanks— J. From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org> Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 10:36 To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb Mail <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Urgent Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear all, I apologise, the Doodle responses to this poll for the call on Monday got wiped – I am at a loss how – and I didn’t have time to view which was the preferred slot. Would you please be so kind as to re-enter your choices in this new poll and I will send the invites out shortly. https://doodle.com/poll/gwi5ads2ssnzu4tx[doodle.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__doodle.com_poll_gwi5ads2ssnzu4tx&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=dqLP1wJqBvDSYLKrSEaAkCi_Kv0Mk5D_d32n29DHCN8&m=KHi7QlfSUZr-B166IyfLeYMXzZ1NIhB-sjHs3zJ4gg0&s=h-mrWVibTM-dd6EQw8NRGK7dVqp49GM7FSIlJQVVPZI&e=> Thank you, Nathalie From: <gnso-secs-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 5:44 PM To: James Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, "kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb@icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-secs] Doodle poll: GNSO Chairs, IGO IRT Liaison and Staff support discussion call Dear all, In order to schedule a discussion next week, similar to the one held prior to ICANN59, between the GNSO Council chairs, the IGO IRT – GNSO Council liaison and staff support, please be so kind as to complete the below Doodle poll: https://icannorg.doodle.com/poll/hfmhci7r6w54qxa4[icannorg.doodle.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icannorg.doodle.com_poll_hfmhci7r6w54qxa4&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3mMOeqECqeCGNhT56kej4tHm0qNqRHhz7DwgHfPlPzo&s=Apis2IV1SNIvgQKf8VLIeBsTH-b9jNRkMBTmk2wsEQ8&e=> Thank you! Kind regards, Nathalie Nathalie Peregrine Manager, Operations Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine@icann.org <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org%20> Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<applewebdata://EB3A6F47-9760-400D-A39B-A7EFFC56B467/learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>
participants (2)
-
Dennis Chang -
Tan Tanaka, Dennis