- Gnso-newgtld-wg - lists.icann.org

RSP Services and the Criteria for being Pre-Approved
by Jeff Neuman June 11, 2019

June 11, 2019

All, In re-reading all of the comments to the Initial Report, the comments submitted during our CC2 process, the Initial Report itself and the transcripts from the previous calls on the RSP Pre-approval process, there seems to be general agreement that the RSP Pre-Approval Process have the same criteria with respect to evaluation and testing (if applicable) as those RSPs that wait until the actual Application Window to be evaluated as part of a Registry Operator's proposal for a given string. In other words, the common theme was to treat everyone equally in all applicable respects. Therefore, my proposal is to give the technical discussions involving the precise evaluation criteria to be used more time for discussion. We should create a small group to discuss the policies behind the evaluation process in conjunction with those materials already discussed within the Working Group within what was previously known as Work Track 4, the Initial Report (Sections 2.7.7 Applicant Reviews and 2.11.1 Registry System Testing), the comments we got back on those sections which were reviewed by SubGroup B (2.7.7) and Subgroup C (2.11.1). This also has the advantage of giving some more time for ICANN to get back to us on the EBERO / Pre-delegation questions raised by Jim and for us as a group to evaluate those responses. I will discuss this later on the call in 40 minutes, but wanted to give a short heads up on my initial thinking. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive , Suite 600 Mclean , VA 22102 UNITED STATES T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 [cid:image001.jpg@01D451A7.91955BE0] CONFIRMATION OF ORDERS: Please note that we always confirm receipt of orders. To assist us in identifying orders, please use the word ORDER in the subject line of your email. If you have sent us an order and have not received confirmation on the same working day (PST) it is possible that your order has not been received or has been trapped by our spam filter. In this case, please contact your client manager or admin(a)comlaude.com for confirmation that the order has been received and is being processed. Thank you. ________________________________ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com>

1 0

Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 03 June 2019
by Julie Hedlund June 11, 2019

June 11, 2019

Dear Working Group members, Please see below the notes from the meeting today, 03 June 2019. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat, which will be posted at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-06-03+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Pr…. Please also see the referenced documents at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R4zXTH3hIgfbqoxyqsSp19Bl6J96NNeV7oCgxsX…. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes and Action Items: Action Items: ACTION ITEM 1: 2.2.6 Accreditation Programs (e.g. RSP Pre-Approval): Ask a clarifying question to the GAC re: GAC: New Idea - RSP Program should consider security threats and use tools such as ICANN’s DAAR to identify any potential security risks for an application. Question from Jeff: How exactly would DAAR be used for this purpose? DAAR looks at current activity within a particular string, not at the likelihood of security threats in future applications. Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): No updates provided. 2. Review of Summary Documents a. 2.2.6 Accreditation Programs (e.g., RSP Pre-Approval) - (see - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R4zXTH3hIgfbqoxyqsSp19Bl6J96NNeV7oCgxsX…) Outstanding Items: General Considerations for Program Implementation: -- GAC Comment - How would DAAR be used be used for this purpose? Not an RSP pre-approval issue -- ACTION ITEM: Ask for clarification. -- RrSG: New Idea - Program should take into consideration interoperability with ICANN-accredited registrars and there should be additional standardization of certain operational requirements. Note from Jeff: In discussion with Registrars at GDD Summit, they indicated that this comment was meant for all RSPs and not just those in the Pre-Approval Program. So to the extent that in general we adopt this requirement, it would be adopted for all RSPs. -- NCSG: New Idea - The program should be clear and transparent. Supports public cataloging of receipts against RSPs, and investigation and response taken to the complaints, as well as a process for rejecting approved RSPs. Comment from Jeff: Generally there are no compliance actions against an RSP, but rather against Registry Operators. How would this information be used? Discussion: -- The third-parties don’t have a contract with ICANN so don’t see how you could have a publicly available list. Not sure there is any value. -- Issues: 1) public cataloging of complaints; 2) Once you are on a pre-approved list how is a company removed and how is that communicated? Focus on the second question. -- Don’t think the pre-approval process would be public -- you are either on the list or not. -- If we are going to talk about a mechanism to get a company off the pre-approved list, we should think about what is the point and what are the impacts. -- Could indicate whether part of the question is not implementable. -- The pre-approval is you are pre-approved or you are not. If you provide back end services for a registry operator and the RO breaches SLAs there will be consequences for the RSP, but those consequences are determined by the RO.  -- These are private contracts. Mechanisms for un-preapproval don't really have a place. -- The intent of the pre-approval is to overcome the repetitive nature of the technical evaluation experienced in the 2012 round. -- There isn’t a concept of an “unapproved” RSP. When we talk about RSPs and if they become “unapproved” that is a business proposition. This isn’t a certification process, but you are qualified to do business in the accreditation program. -- Maybe instead call them “pre-evaluated” RSPs. -- QUESTION: Does RSP pre-approval apply regardless of the services to be provided in connection with a particular application or is the ability to meet the needs related to proposed new services part of the evaluation even if the RSP is Pre-approved? QUESTION -- What might be at issue here is what's the term of the pre-approval? It holds until the completion of the application and evaluation process. From then on the registry operator is responsible for meeting the technical requirements. -- How is the applicant protected if there is a problem? -- If there are new registry services proposed then there would need to be a new evaluation. -- In terms of the applicant, one of the solutions could be if the applicant picked a RSP that had been taken off the list then the applicant could have time to pick another pre-approved RSP. -- On the EBERO and what it takes to get someone off the list, we haven’t agreed on that yet. Not sure what process that would be. -- The pre-approval holds until the completion of the application/evaluation process. After that the RO is responsible for meeting the technical requirements. Not sure how you would remove pre-approval. -- Whether an RSP is on a pre-approved list or not: Should be that at a point in time this RSP has qualified against a standard set of questions and that this stands for a period of time. There still would need to be monitoring by the RO. -- Agreement on the need for more information from ICANN on the EBERO-triggering incidents. -- This was supposed to provide efficiencies in the process. This was never meant to be an accreditation. -- Need to decide how long the pre-approval lasts and when another evaluation is required. -- the assumption was that the RSPs would retain their quality for that period of time, subject to pre-delegation testing. Timing of Program Launch: -- Set up principles: 1) That applicants should be able to use the results of a pre-approval program should allow sufficient time for an applicant to be able to use the results when they are deciding to apply for a new string. -- Not consistent with the comments of RySG -- the pre-approval is a condition for the next round. Next meeting: Start with Factoring in the Number of TLDs the RSP Intends to Support.

4 4

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] [Ext] RE: Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Tuesday, 11 June 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Steve Chan June 11, 2019

June 11, 2019

Dear Jim, all, In regards to your questions: We have made the request to GDD and will provide an updated on ETA as soon as we are able. Thanks for the reminder about the document (here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l9pIXkiu_d5zPVqTM09Z5BiJ1Y3-mhnwaZLPfDD…) The changes were made directly in the relevant Google doc, which is always available on the Wiki here: https://community.icann.org/x/NAp1Aw. We’ll take another PDF snapshot of the work plan at the end of the upcoming meeting, assuming there are not major concerns. Best, Steve From: Jim Prendergast <jim(a)GALWAYSG.COM> Date: Friday, June 7, 2019 at 10:43 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>, "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Tuesday, 11 June 2019 at 03:00 UTC Thanks Steve – 2 questions: a) For Item 2 – do you have an ETA on the additional data request from ICANN org as it relates to 1) EBERO Triggering incidents by approved RSPs since the last report in mid 2017 and 2) the problems associated with RSPs passing pre-delegation testing Kristine discussed at the GDD? b) is there a document we should be reviewing ahead of time for agenda item 3? Thanks From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> On Behalf Of Steve Chan Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 5:27 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Tuesday, 11 June 2019 at 03:00 UTC Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Tuesday, 11 June 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Welcome/Review of the Agenda/Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs) Review of Summary Documents (continued) 2.2.6 Accreditation Programs (e.g., RSP Pre-Approval) - (see Overarching Issues - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R4zXTH3hIgfbqoxyqsSp19Bl6J96NNeV7oCgxsX… [docs.google.com] 2.3.2 Global Public Interest – (see Foundational Issues - https://docs.google.com/document/d/15rwviHM6AYtqDqyB6_5Yij2dTL6iuou8z7A32yz… [docs.google.com] Work plan/schedule post-ICANN65 AOB Note, in relation to agenda item 2, WG leadership and staff have tried to prepare summary documents for each topic that seeks to help you review some of the background material, consider a high-level summary of what we believe the WG is seeking to accomplish for the topic, a high-level summary of public comment received, and finally, a catch all at the end of each section (e.g., follow-up, parking lot, next steps). As requested, staff is also including a download of the two working documents. Please note that these represent a snapshot and will of course become out of sync as the working documents are updated. If you need a dial out or would like to send an apology for this call, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Office Telephone: +1.310.301.5800 Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses [learn.icann.org] and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages [gnso.icann.org] Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ [facebook.com] http://gnso.icann.org/en/ [gnso.icann.org] Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Email: steve.chan(a)icann.org Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org]

3 2

Message regarding specific recommendations from the CCT Review Team
by Steve Chan June 10, 2019

June 10, 2019

Dear WG Members, Please see below for a message from Larisa Gurnick, Vice-President of ICANN org’s Multi-stakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) department. It concerns several recommendations pertaining to SubPro which the ICANN Board has passed through to our Working Group, as it also did with several other recommendations directed toward other GNSO working groups, the GNSO Council and a number of other stakeholder groups. Please let staff know if you would like to discuss or have questions for Larisa. On a related note, please find the link to this WG’s CCT-RT recommendations analysis document, which seeks to determine how SubPro is currently addressing the recommendations directed at the WG and what additional work may be needed: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PGV5_nMafLWtSHyCGdr-b8eqoJj9B8YKBSh…. Also note that the CCT-RT recommendations directed at this WG have been integrated into the relevant sections of the various public comment analysis documents (i.e., Sub Group A, B, C). Best, Steve Dear Members of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, The purpose of this note is to highlight the Board resolution passed on 1 March 2019 - see https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en - that calls for a set of Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) Final Recommendations to be passed through to community groups. As articulated in the Board resolution, “recognizing that the Board has the obligation and responsibility to balance the work of ICANN in order to preserve the ability for ICANN org to serve its Mission and the public interest, the Board decided on three categories of action”: Accepting recommendations, subject to costing and implementation considerations; Placing recommendations (in whole or in part) in "Pending" status, directing ICANN org to perform specific actions to enable the Board to take further actions; Passing recommendations (in whole or in part) to community groups the CCT-RT identified for their consideration. The Board noted fourteen such recommendations (9, 10, 12, 16, 19, 20, 25, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35). We invite you to refer to pages 1-4 of the scorecard https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-final-cct-recs-scor… which compile pass-through recommendations, including the groups they are addressed to. Accordingly, ICANN org wishes to notify you of the recommendations the ICANN Board resolved to pass through to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, in whole or in part, for your consideration: Recommendation 9. Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP Working Group, as suggested by the CCT-RT. Recommendation 12. Recommendation 16 (in part). Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the Registries Stakeholder Group, Registrar Stakeholder Group, Generic Names Supporting Organization, Second Security, Stability & Resiliency of DNS Review Team, as suggested by the CCT-RT. In the scorecard, the Board noted that “it is not accepting the policy directives that may be inherent here but rather, passes on such elements of the recommendation to the relevant community groups to consider”. Recommendation 25. In the scorecard, the Board noted that ICANN org’s role is to implement the adopted recommendations resulting from your PDP WG’s work. “To the extent that policies are adopted consistent with the recommendations, ICANN org will update the Applicant Guide Book (AGB) accordingly”. Recommendation 29. Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the Generic Names Supporting Organization, as suggested by the CCT-RT. To inform work relating to recommendations 29 and 30, the ICANN Board suggested that the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG could take on, should you “choose to do so, defining the term ‘Global South’ or agreeing on another term to describe underserved or underrepresented regions or stakeholders in coordination with ICANN org”. Recommendation 32. In the scorecard, the Board noted that “this topic is being discussed in the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG and expectation is for a high-level program/guidance to be provided as a result of this work”. Recommendation 33. Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the Governmental Advisory Committee, as suggested by the CCT-RT. In the scorecard, the Board noted that the “Board-GAC Working Group could also serve as a valuable contributor to this work as that is an avenue for the Board and GAC to work together on receiving/acting on advice. Outputs of that work could inform the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG on how the GAC should be able to provide advice on individual gTLDs. The Board notes that the outcomes of that work could be improved if the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG and the GAC are able to work together on templates, timelines, etc”. Recommendation 34. Recommendation 35. We would like to highlight the following language of the Board resolution: “in passing these recommendations through, the Board is neither accepting, nor rejecting the recommendations. […] Passing recommendations through to community groups is not a directive that the groups identified should formally address any of the issues within those recommendations. It is within the purview of each group to identify whether work will be taken on and the topics that the group will address”. As indicated in the resolution, the Board encourages community groups to be “mindful of any interdependencies with ongoing work and discussions”. Additionally, the Board suggests “to the referenced community groups that the CCT-RT's proposed priority levels be taken into account as the groups decide whether, how and when to address the CCT-RT recommendations that are being passed through […]”. Additionally, we would like to flag the Board suggestion that for transparency purposes, “it would be helpful to have records or reporting made available to the ICANN community on how the community group considered the items coming out of the CCT-RT. The Board encourages any level of reporting that the groups are able to provide as the ICANN org and Board track action on the CCT-RT's recommendations”. Please consider providing updates on your progress in addressing (as appropriate) these recommendations, to be included with ICANN org’s reporting. Background The Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) released its Final Report on 8 September 2018 – see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cct-final-08sep18-en.pdf. The CCT-RT Final Report contains 35 recommendations and is the culmination of nearly three years of work, reviewing how the expansion of top-level domain names impacted competition, consumer trust and choice. For more information on the CCT Review and Specific Reviews, please readhttps://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en#article4.6. The ICANN Board took action on each of the 35 recommendations produced by the CCT-RT - see https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en - on 1 March 2019 and was informed by public comment input received on the Final report (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cct-final-recs-2018-10-08-en) The Board’s decisions on each recommendation is documented in the scorecard published at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-final-cct-recs-scor…. A blog post on the Board action can be found at https://www.icann.org/news/blog/board-action-on-competition-consumer-trust-… for more context. We thank you for your collaboration in considering the CCT-RT output. Please let us know whether you have any questions. Thank you. Best regards, Larisa Gurnick Vice President, Multi-stakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI), ICANN

1 0

Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Tuesday, 11 June 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Steve Chan June 8, 2019

June 8, 2019

Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Tuesday, 11 June 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Welcome/Review of the Agenda/Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs) Review of Summary Documents (continued) 2.2.6 Accreditation Programs (e.g., RSP Pre-Approval) - (see Overarching Issues - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R4zXTH3hIgfbqoxyqsSp19Bl6J96NNeV7oCgxsX…) 2.3.2 Global Public Interest – (see Foundational Issues - https://docs.google.com/document/d/15rwviHM6AYtqDqyB6_5Yij2dTL6iuou8z7A32yz…) Work plan/schedule post-ICANN65 AOB Note, in relation to agenda item 2, WG leadership and staff have tried to prepare summary documents for each topic that seeks to help you review some of the background material, consider a high-level summary of what we believe the WG is seeking to accomplish for the topic, a high-level summary of public comment received, and finally, a catch all at the end of each section (e.g., follow-up, parking lot, next steps). As requested, staff is also including a download of the two working documents. Please note that these represent a snapshot and will of course become out of sync as the working documents are updated. If you need a dial out or would like to send an apology for this call, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Office Telephone: +1.310.301.5800 Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ http://gnso.icann.org/en/ Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Email: steve.chan(a)icann.org Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org]

2 1

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 03 June 2019
by Jamie Baxter June 6, 2019

June 6, 2019

3 3

WT5
by Arasteh June 5, 2019

June 5, 2019

Dear All I wished to be connected to WT 5 and NOT AUCTION group Kavouss Sent from my iPhone

1 0

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] [Ext] RE: Helpful information / Calendar view of meetings
by Terri Agnew June 5, 2019

June 5, 2019

Hi Anne, The dates you are seeing are the end of May and beginning of June. Scroll down a little bit and you will see the rest of June. [cid:image001.png@01D51B0E.8BBE1500] Let me know if further assistance is needed, Terri From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 at 5:59 PM To: Terri Agnew <terri.agnew(a)icann.org>, "Austin, Donna via Gnso-newgtld-wg" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: Helpful information / Calendar view of meetings Terri, This is confusing – the first link leads to some meetings that appear to be scheduled June 28, 29, and 30? (The meeting schedule says June 24-27 Monday through Thursday.) Here is what I am seeing but maybe the dates appearing above the schedule are wrong? [cid:image001.png@01D51AEE.18C303F0] From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> On Behalf Of Terri Agnew Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 1:06 PM To: Austin, Donna via Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Helpful information / Calendar view of meetings [EXTERNAL] ________________________________ Dear all, To help stay organized, in addition to the ics to download on your calendars there are three resources for you to find meeting dates and times for Council, PDP, EPDP and CCWG- Auction Proceed meetings. 1. Global calendar: All SO and AC events: https://features.icann.org/calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_cal…> 2. GNSO Master calendar: GNSO Working Groups, Council events, transcriptions, and recordings: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> 3. GNSO Wiki: Working Groups and Council meeting agendas, recordings, notes, action items and background documents: https://community.icann.org/category/gnso Thank you. With kind regards, Terri --- Terri Agnew Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: terri.agnew(a)icann.org<mailto:terri.agnew@icann.org> Skype ID: terri.agnew.icann Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwM…> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGN…> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_cal…> ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

1 0

Helpful information / Calendar view of meetings
by Terri Agnew June 4, 2019

June 4, 2019

Dear all, To help stay organized, in addition to the ics to download on your calendars there are three resources for you to find meeting dates and times for Council, PDP, EPDP and CCWG- Auction Proceed meetings. 1. Global calendar: All SO and AC events: https://features.icann.org/calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_cal…> 2. GNSO Master calendar: GNSO Working Groups, Council events, transcriptions, and recordings: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> 3. GNSO Wiki: Working Groups and Council meeting agendas, recordings, notes, action items and background documents: https://community.icann.org/category/gnso Thank you. With kind regards, Terri --- Terri Agnew Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: terri.agnew(a)icann.org<mailto:terri.agnew@icann.org> Skype ID: terri.agnew.icann Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwM…> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGN…> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_cal…>

2 1

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 8 October 2018 at 15:00 UTC
by Jamie Baxter June 4, 2019

June 4, 2019

3 2