Jeff, No objections to an extension as proposed, for GAC and everyone else. Just out of curiosity, can you / staff please enlighten us as to how many comments have been submitted since 22 Mar? i.e. Would that be the single comment submitted by one Jannik Skou? Thanks, Justine Chew *​Greg S: "The Avri", really? Lol.​* ----- On 19 April 2017 at 06:36, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Jeff and The Avri,

No objections to an extension -- quite the opposite. We will need all the time we can get to respond on behalf of the IPC. One of our members shared their individual response -- it was 34 pages long.....

Greg

*Greg Shatan *C: 917-816-6428 S: gsshatan Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428 gregshatanipc@gmail.com

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz> wrote:

...

Hi Jeff

No objection to extending the deadline as suggested.

Donna

*From:* gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounce s@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jeff Neuman *Sent:* Tuesday, April 18, 2017 2:11 AM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org *Subject:* [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposal to Extend CC2 Deadline

All,

Last week the Avri and I received a formal request from the Governmental Advisory Committee to “consider an extension of the deadline for public comments to the Community Comment 2 (CC2) questionnaire.” In light of the extensive nature of the questionnaire as well as the desire to get as many responses as possible, Avri and I are inclined to agree to this request. In order to be fair, we believe the extension should be applied to everyone, not just the GAC.

Working backwards, it is our desire to have a summary of all of the public comments to discuss at ICANN59 at the end of June. The document deadline for that meeting is 15 business days prior to the meeting (beginning of June). In order to give staff some time to compile the summary in time for the document deadline, we are proposing *May 22, 2017* as the new date for comments to be due. This would be a 3 week extension for the entire community.

I know this is asking for quick turnaround, but please let us know by no later than *April 20th *if you have any strong objections to this proposal. Otherwise, we will let the community know about the extension on April 21st.

Best regards,

*Jeffrey J. Neuman*

*Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA* | *Com Laude USA*

1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600

Mclean, VA 22102, United States

E: *jeff.neuman@valideus.com <jeff.neuman@valideus.com>* or *jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>*

T: +1.703.635.7514 <(703)%20635-7514>

M: +1.202.549.5079 <(202)%20549-5079>

@Jintlaw

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

Justine, You'll have to give Jeff credit for "The Avri" (see original email). I merely responded.... Greg (S.) *Greg Shatan *C: 917-816-6428 S: gsshatan Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428 gregshatanipc@gmail.com On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Justine Chew <justine.chew@gmail.com> wrote:

Jeff,

No objections to an extension as proposed, for GAC and everyone else.

Just out of curiosity, can you / staff please enlighten us as to how many comments have been submitted since 22 Mar? i.e. Would that be the single comment submitted by one Jannik Skou?

Thanks,

Justine Chew

*​Greg S: "The Avri", really? Lol.​*

-----

On 19 April 2017 at 06:36, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Dear Jeff and The Avri,

No objections to an extension -- quite the opposite. We will need all the time we can get to respond on behalf of the IPC. One of our members shared their individual response -- it was 34 pages long.....

Greg

*Greg Shatan *C: 917-816-6428 <(917)%20816-6428> S: gsshatan Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428 <(646)%20845-9428> gregshatanipc@gmail.com

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz> wrote:

...

Hi Jeff

No objection to extending the deadline as suggested.

Donna

*From:* gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounce s@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jeff Neuman *Sent:* Tuesday, April 18, 2017 2:11 AM *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org *Subject:* [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposal to Extend CC2 Deadline

All,

Last week the Avri and I received a formal request from the Governmental Advisory Committee to “consider an extension of the deadline for public comments to the Community Comment 2 (CC2) questionnaire.” In light of the extensive nature of the questionnaire as well as the desire to get as many responses as possible, Avri and I are inclined to agree to this request. In order to be fair, we believe the extension should be applied to everyone, not just the GAC.

Working backwards, it is our desire to have a summary of all of the public comments to discuss at ICANN59 at the end of June. The document deadline for that meeting is 15 business days prior to the meeting (beginning of June). In order to give staff some time to compile the summary in time for the document deadline, we are proposing *May 22, 2017* as the new date for comments to be due. This would be a 3 week extension for the entire community.

I know this is asking for quick turnaround, but please let us know by no later than *April 20th *if you have any strong objections to this proposal. Otherwise, we will let the community know about the extension on April 21st.

Best regards,

*Jeffrey J. Neuman*

*Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA* | *Com Laude USA*

1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600

Mclean, VA 22102, United States

E: *jeff.neuman@valideus.com <jeff.neuman@valideus.com>* or *jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>*

T: +1.703.635.7514 <(703)%20635-7514>

M: +1.202.549.5079 <(202)%20549-5079>

@Jintlaw

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

As former GAC member I can understand the need of this extension hence I agree with the extension. Avri made a good point encouraging people to respond as well as clarigying the possibility of multiple answers. Let’s extend to make the survey really valuable. Kisses to all Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. HAPPY 2017! On 4/19/17, 7:18 PM, "gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of avri doria" <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of avri@apc.org> wrote: Hi, I want to append a comment to this. While I fully support the extension, I want to encourage people to submit their comments as soon as they can. As most of you know the sub teams are currently working on all these issues and the sooner they get input, the better. Everyone in the leadership group is waiting with bated breath and is eager to see the answers that are ready. Also want to note, that there are many questions, and there is no barrier to submitting multiple responses dealing the variety of questions. Also those who submit early will have the opportunity for making further comments should they think of new elements to add to their answers. So please, though we are recommending an extension, please feel free to submit the work that is already ready. Thanks avri On 18-Apr-17 05:11, Jeff Neuman wrote: > > All, > > > > Last week the Avri and I received a formal request from the > Governmental Advisory Committee to “consider an extension of the > deadline for public comments to the Community Comment 2 (CC2) > questionnaire.” In light of the extensive nature of the questionnaire > as well as the desire to get as many responses as possible, Avri and I > are inclined to agree to this request. In order to be fair, we > believe the extension should be applied to everyone, not just the GAC. > > > > Working backwards, it is our desire to have a summary of all of the > public comments to discuss at ICANN59 at the end of June. The > document deadline for that meeting is 15 business days prior to the > meeting (beginning of June). In order to give staff some time to > compile the summary in time for the document deadline, we are > proposing *May 22, 2017* as the new date for comments to be due. This > would be a 3 week extension for the entire community. > > > > I know this is asking for quick turnaround, but please let us know by > no later than *April 20^th *if you have any strong objections to this > proposal. Otherwise, we will let the community know about the > extension on April 21^st . > > > > Best regards, > > > > *Jeffrey J. Neuman* > > *Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA***| *Com Laude USA* > > 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600 > > Mclean, VA 22102, United States > > E: _jeff.neuman@valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com>_or > _jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>_ > > T: +1.703.635.7514 > > M: +1.202.549.5079 > > @Jintlaw > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list > Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

Dear Kavouss, I have received heard your requests and seen your complaint to the chairs of the GNSO and the GAC. Staff reviewed our meeting time and found that 4 UTC was not possible, especially for our full meeting as that is a 90 minute meeting that would interfere with the WS2 meetings that are scheduled in the 5 UTC time frame. We have been very careful to keep our scheduling out of the WS2 time tracks as that was one of the original concerns that people had in establishing our rotating scheduling. The other goal we had was consistency in the rotating times at which we held meetings as much as possible. Finally the point was the sharing of discomfort among the residents of various time frames which was accepted by the WG at the beginning of this process. At this point you are the only one with this specific request. Should there be a consensus in the group that we need to review and possibly redo the rotating schedule of meetings, I will ask the staff to help us find a new solution that is acceptable to a consensus of the participants in the WG. I will ask that the issue be added as AOB to our full meeting to find out whether there is consensus on the need to reschedule our meetings. Thank you Avri On 01-May-17 13:21, Arasteh wrote:

Avri Once again, I reiterate-my position which was supported by many European residents that the window of 03,00 UTC is a painful window for meeting . I sincerely and respectfully request you to move it to 04,00 UTC which does not make a big change for Asia Pacific people. Failure to do that is a clear sign to exclude People from Europe to attend Regards Kavouss

Sent from my iPhone

...

On 20 Apr 2017, at 00:18, avri doria <avri@apc.org> wrote:

Hi,

I want to append a comment to this. While I fully support the extension, I want to encourage people to submit their comments as soon as they can. As most of you know the sub teams are currently working on all these issues and the sooner they get input, the better. Everyone in the leadership group is waiting with bated breath and is eager to see the answers that are ready. Also want to note, that there are many questions, and there is no barrier to submitting multiple responses dealing the variety of questions. Also those who submit early will have the opportunity for making further comments should they think of new elements to add to their answers.

So please, though we are recommending an extension, please feel free to submit the work that is already ready.

Thanks

avri

...

On 18-Apr-17 05:11, Jeff Neuman wrote:

All,

Last week the Avri and I received a formal request from the Governmental Advisory Committee to “consider an extension of the deadline for public comments to the Community Comment 2 (CC2) questionnaire.” In light of the extensive nature of the questionnaire as well as the desire to get as many responses as possible, Avri and I are inclined to agree to this request. In order to be fair, we believe the extension should be applied to everyone, not just the GAC.

Working backwards, it is our desire to have a summary of all of the public comments to discuss at ICANN59 at the end of June. The document deadline for that meeting is 15 business days prior to the meeting (beginning of June). In order to give staff some time to compile the summary in time for the document deadline, we are proposing *May 22, 2017* as the new date for comments to be due. This would be a 3 week extension for the entire community.

I know this is asking for quick turnaround, but please let us know by no later than *April 20^th *if you have any strong objections to this proposal. Otherwise, we will let the community know about the extension on April 21^st .

Best regards,

*Jeffrey J. Neuman*

*Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA***| *Com Laude USA*

1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600

Mclean, VA 22102, United States

E: _jeff.neuman@valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com>_or _jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>_

T: +1.703.635.7514

M: +1.202.549.5079

@Jintlaw

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

Kavouss, I want to assure you that in our scheduling calls, there is absolutely no mal-intent or any desire to drive away participation of the GAC. In fact, we are trying to do the opposite. As you know, scheduling calls where everyone can attend has been one of our biggest issues and one for which there just is no really good solution. We also have to schedule calls out a number of weeks in advance so that everyone can plan their schedules accordingly. ICANN has given us three time slots which do not conflict with other working groups, CCWGs, WS2 and other calls that regularly take place. The three times we have been given are: 15:00 UTC, 20:00 UTC and 3:00 UTC. We can again explore whether there are other time slots available, but we have already tried on numerous occasions. That said, on a personal note, I kindly request that you please not take this out on the PDP leadership team and you have some patience with us. Like you, we are all volunteering our time and resources to try and do the best possible work that we can. We are all trying to do the right thing and Avri, the Work Team Leaders and ICANN staff are doing the best that we can to accommodate everyone. But that is not always possible and we are all having to make sacrifices. Below, I provide a sample of how certain cities (in which I believe we have participants), are impacted by the rotating time schedules. At 15:00 UTC currently, it is the following times in the following cities: 1. New York, USA – 11:00 am 2. Los Angeles, USA –8:00 am 3. London, UK – 4:00 pm 4. Geneva, Switzerland – 5:00 pm 5. Moscow, Russia – 6:00 pm 6. Beijing, China – 11:00pm 7. Tokyo, Japan –12:00 am (midnight) 8. Melbourne, Australia – 1:00 am 9. Rio, Brazil – 10:00 am 10. Buenos Aires, Argentina : -- 12:00 pm (noon) 11. Tehran, Iran – 7:30 pm At 20:00 UTC, the following 1. New York, USA – 4:00 pm 2. Los Angeles, USA – 1:00 pm 3. London, UK – 9:00 pm 4. Geneva, Switzerland – 10:00 pm 5. Moscow, Russia – 11:00 pm 6. Beijing, China – 4:00 am 7. Tokyo, Japan – 5:00 am 8. Melbourne, Australia – 6:00 am 9. Rio, Brazil – 3:00 pm 10. Buenos Aires, Argentina : -- 5:00 pm 11. Tehran, Iran – 12:30 am And 03:00 UTC 1. New York, USA – 11:00 pm 2. Los Angeles, USA – 8:00 pm 3. London, UK – 4:00 am 4. Geneva, Switzerland – 5:00 am 5. Moscow, Russia – 6:00 am 6. Beijing, China – 11:00 am 7. Tokyo, Japan –12:00 pm (noon) 8. Melbourne, Australia – 1:00 pm 9. Rio, Brazil – 10:00 pm 10. Buenos Aires, Argentina : 12:00 am (midnight) 11. Tehran, Iran – 7:30 am If you look at the highlighted areas and you assume that 11:00 pm – 6:00 am has pain in attending, then you can see almost everyone has some pain. Those in Russia, China, Japan and Australia feeling the pain 2 out of every 3 calls. Moving this to 04:00 UTC, in addition to the time conflict with WS2, would be worse for those on the East Coast of the US, would move Moscow out of the pain zone, but would put those in Rio in the pain zone. 1. New York, USA – 12:00 am (midnight) 2. Los Angeles, USA – 8:00 pm 3. London, UK – 5:00 am 4. Geneva, Switzerland – 6:00 am 5. Moscow, Russia – 7:00 am 6. Beijing, China – 12:00 pm 7. Tokyo, Japan –1:00 pm 8. Melbourne, Australia – 1:00 pm 9. Rio, Brazil – 11:00 pm 10. Buenos Aires, Argentina : 1:00 am (midnight) 11. Tehran, Iran – 8:30 am As you know, calls are recorded and transcripts are provided for any calls that have to be missed. Therefore, hopefully everyone can be caught up on the materials. We also strongly encourage participation on the e-mail lists. I hope this e-mail, these examples, and my explanation help you understand a little better our thought processes behind the schedule. Thank you for your participation in the SubPro PDP and we truly hope you continue to stay involved. Our success is due in large part to those, like you, who consistently contribute to our work and show such dedication and passion for these issues. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600 Mclean, VA 22102, United States E: jeff.neuman@valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com> or jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 @Jintlaw From: gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh Sent: Monday, May 1, 2017 8:41 PM To: avri doria <avri@apc.org>; Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>; James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com>; Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch; mark.carvell@culture.gov.uk; fin.pet@erst.dk; Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@gmail.com>; <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <jorge.cancio@bakom.admin.ch>; gac@gac.icann.org; gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Meeting schedule was Re: Proposal to Extend CC2 Deadline Avri, I check the schedule of CCWG Accountability for the month of May and found that one Tuesday 16 May , they have Jurisdiction meeting at 05,00 UTC thus other Tuesday they do niot have any meeting at that time. I therefore request to be collaborative and change the timing of your General Meeting to 04,00 UTC and ask CCWG Jurisdiction to shift their meeting by Half an hour to start at 05,30 not to have any clash with your meeting .As they meet for only 60 minutes still they end by 06,30 UTC at that only one meeting per night. If you insist , I interpret that this is an effort to EXCLUDE GAC TO ATTEND THE PDP. I will formally announce that to the responsible group. You and staff need to kindly work it out in consultation with Bernie. I insist on that. Regards Kavouss 2017-05-01 20:59 GMT+02:00 avri doria <avri@apc.org<mailto:avri@apc.org>>: Dear Kavouss, I have received heard your requests and seen your complaint to the chairs of the GNSO and the GAC. Staff reviewed our meeting time and found that 4 UTC was not possible, especially for our full meeting as that is a 90 minute meeting that would interfere with the WS2 meetings that are scheduled in the 5 UTC time frame. We have been very careful to keep our scheduling out of the WS2 time tracks as that was one of the original concerns that people had in establishing our rotating scheduling. The other goal we had was consistency in the rotating times at which we held meetings as much as possible. Finally the point was the sharing of discomfort among the residents of various time frames which was accepted by the WG at the beginning of this process. At this point you are the only one with this specific request. Should there be a consensus in the group that we need to review and possibly redo the rotating schedule of meetings, I will ask the staff to help us find a new solution that is acceptable to a consensus of the participants in the WG. I will ask that the issue be added as AOB to our full meeting to find out whether there is consensus on the need to reschedule our meetings. Thank you Avri On 01-May-17 13:21, Arasteh wrote:

Avri Once again, I reiterate-my position which was supported by many European residents that the window of 03,00 UTC is a painful window for meeting . I sincerely and respectfully request you to move it to 04,00 UTC which does not make a big change for Asia Pacific people. Failure to do that is a clear sign to exclude People from Europe to attend Regards Kavouss

Sent from my iPhone

...

On 20 Apr 2017, at 00:18, avri doria <avri@apc.org<mailto:avri@apc.org>> wrote:

Hi,

I want to append a comment to this. While I fully support the extension, I want to encourage people to submit their comments as soon as they can. As most of you know the sub teams are currently working on all these issues and the sooner they get input, the better. Everyone in the leadership group is waiting with bated breath and is eager to see the answers that are ready. Also want to note, that there are many questions, and there is no barrier to submitting multiple responses dealing the variety of questions. Also those who submit early will have the opportunity for making further comments should they think of new elements to add to their answers.

So please, though we are recommending an extension, please feel free to submit the work that is already ready.

Thanks

avri

...

On 18-Apr-17 05:11, Jeff Neuman wrote:

All,

Last week the Avri and I received a formal request from the Governmental Advisory Committee to “consider an extension of the deadline for public comments to the Community Comment 2 (CC2) questionnaire.” In light of the extensive nature of the questionnaire as well as the desire to get as many responses as possible, Avri and I are inclined to agree to this request. In order to be fair, we believe the extension should be applied to everyone, not just the GAC.

Working backwards, it is our desire to have a summary of all of the public comments to discuss at ICANN59 at the end of June. The document deadline for that meeting is 15 business days prior to the meeting (beginning of June). In order to give staff some time to compile the summary in time for the document deadline, we are proposing *May 22, 2017* as the new date for comments to be due. This would be a 3 week extension for the entire community.

I know this is asking for quick turnaround, but please let us know by no later than *April 20^th *if you have any strong objections to this proposal. Otherwise, we will let the community know about the extension on April 21^st .

Best regards,

*Jeffrey J. Neuman*

*Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA***| *Com Laude USA*

1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600

Mclean, VA 22102, United States

E: _jeff.neuman@valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com> <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com>>_or _jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>>_

T: +1.703.635.7514<tel:%2B1.703.635.7514>

M: +1.202.549.5079<tel:%2B1.202.549.5079>

@Jintlaw

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

I don’t think Jeff and Avri are ignoring anyone. It appears they are trying to balance regional participation based on a vote previously taken by this WG regarding staggering of call times. The tasks set before this WG are extremely difficult. I support the approach taken by the Co-Chairs. Last night we had a “thank you” from a participant based in the Far East. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman@lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image003.png@01D2C317.007D9520] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Michele Neylon - Blacknight Sent: Monday, May 01, 2017 7:49 PM To: Jeff Neuman Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org; fin.pet@erst.dk; Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch; gac@gac.icann.org; mark.carvell@culture.gov.uk Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Meeting schedule was Re: Proposal to Extend CC2 Deadline Jeff Thanks for the detailed outline of the times and their impacts. I think you're being very generous and possibly ignoring people who want to achieve a reasonable work / life balance ;-) Regards Michele Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Hosting & Domains http://www.blacknight.host/ http://www.mneylon.social Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal On 1 May 2017, at 22:37, Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>> wrote: Kavouss, I want to assure you that in our scheduling calls, there is absolutely no mal-intent or any desire to drive away participation of the GAC. In fact, we are trying to do the opposite. As you know, scheduling calls where everyone can attend has been one of our biggest issues and one for which there just is no really good solution. We also have to schedule calls out a number of weeks in advance so that everyone can plan their schedules accordingly. ICANN has given us three time slots which do not conflict with other working groups, CCWGs, WS2 and other calls that regularly take place. The three times we have been given are: 15:00 UTC, 20:00 UTC and 3:00 UTC. We can again explore whether there are other time slots available, but we have already tried on numerous occasions. That said, on a personal note, I kindly request that you please not take this out on the PDP leadership team and you have some patience with us. Like you, we are all volunteering our time and resources to try and do the best possible work that we can. We are all trying to do the right thing and Avri, the Work Team Leaders and ICANN staff are doing the best that we can to accommodate everyone. But that is not always possible and we are all having to make sacrifices. Below, I provide a sample of how certain cities (in which I believe we have participants), are impacted by the rotating time schedules. At 15:00 UTC currently, it is the following times in the following cities: 1. New York, USA – 11:00 am 2. Los Angeles, USA –8:00 am 3. London, UK – 4:00 pm 4. Geneva, Switzerland – 5:00 pm 5. Moscow, Russia – 6:00 pm 6. Beijing, China – 11:00pm 7. Tokyo, Japan –12:00 am (midnight) 8. Melbourne, Australia – 1:00 am 9. Rio, Brazil – 10:00 am 10. Buenos Aires, Argentina : -- 12:00 pm (noon) 11. Tehran, Iran – 7:30 pm At 20:00 UTC, the following 1. New York, USA – 4:00 pm 2. Los Angeles, USA – 1:00 pm 3. London, UK – 9:00 pm 4. Geneva, Switzerland – 10:00 pm 5. Moscow, Russia – 11:00 pm 6. Beijing, China – 4:00 am 7. Tokyo, Japan – 5:00 am 8. Melbourne, Australia – 6:00 am 9. Rio, Brazil – 3:00 pm 10. Buenos Aires, Argentina : -- 5:00 pm 11. Tehran, Iran – 12:30 am And 03:00 UTC 1. New York, USA – 11:00 pm 2. Los Angeles, USA – 8:00 pm 3. London, UK – 4:00 am 4. Geneva, Switzerland – 5:00 am 5. Moscow, Russia – 6:00 am 6. Beijing, China – 11:00 am 7. Tokyo, Japan –12:00 pm (noon) 8. Melbourne, Australia – 1:00 pm 9. Rio, Brazil – 10:00 pm 10. Buenos Aires, Argentina : 12:00 am (midnight) 11. Tehran, Iran – 7:30 am If you look at the highlighted areas and you assume that 11:00 pm – 6:00 am has pain in attending, then you can see almost everyone has some pain. Those in Russia, China, Japan and Australia feeling the pain 2 out of every 3 calls. Moving this to 04:00 UTC, in addition to the time conflict with WS2, would be worse for those on the East Coast of the US, would move Moscow out of the pain zone, but would put those in Rio in the pain zone. 1. New York, USA – 12:00 am (midnight) 2. Los Angeles, USA – 8:00 pm 3. London, UK – 5:00 am 4. Geneva, Switzerland – 6:00 am 5. Moscow, Russia – 7:00 am 6. Beijing, China – 12:00 pm 7. Tokyo, Japan –1:00 pm 8. Melbourne, Australia – 1:00 pm 9. Rio, Brazil – 11:00 pm 10. Buenos Aires, Argentina : 1:00 am (midnight) 11. Tehran, Iran – 8:30 am As you know, calls are recorded and transcripts are provided for any calls that have to be missed. Therefore, hopefully everyone can be caught up on the materials. We also strongly encourage participation on the e-mail lists. I hope this e-mail, these examples, and my explanation help you understand a little better our thought processes behind the schedule. Thank you for your participation in the SubPro PDP and we truly hope you continue to stay involved. Our success is due in large part to those, like you, who consistently contribute to our work and show such dedication and passion for these issues. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600 Mclean, VA 22102, United States E: jeff.neuman@valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com> or jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 @Jintlaw From: gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh Sent: Monday, May 1, 2017 8:41 PM To: avri doria <avri@apc.org<mailto:avri@apc.org>>; Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>>; Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch>; mark.carvell@culture.gov.uk<mailto:mark.carvell@culture.gov.uk>; fin.pet@erst.dk<mailto:fin.pet@erst.dk>; Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@gmail.com<mailto:olgacavalli@gmail.com>>; <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>> <jorge.cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:jorge.cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>; gac@gac.icann.org<mailto:gac@gac.icann.org>; gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Meeting schedule was Re: Proposal to Extend CC2 Deadline Avri, I check the schedule of CCWG Accountability for the month of May and found that one Tuesday 16 May , they have Jurisdiction meeting at 05,00 UTC thus other Tuesday they do niot have any meeting at that time. I therefore request to be collaborative and change the timing of your General Meeting to 04,00 UTC and ask CCWG Jurisdiction to shift their meeting by Half an hour to start at 05,30 not to have any clash with your meeting .As they meet for only 60 minutes still they end by 06,30 UTC at that only one meeting per night. If you insist , I interpret that this is an effort to EXCLUDE GAC TO ATTEND THE PDP. I will formally announce that to the responsible group. You and staff need to kindly work it out in consultation with Bernie. I insist on that. Regards Kavouss 2017-05-01 20:59 GMT+02:00 avri doria <avri@apc.org<mailto:avri@apc.org>>: Dear Kavouss, I have received heard your requests and seen your complaint to the chairs of the GNSO and the GAC. Staff reviewed our meeting time and found that 4 UTC was not possible, especially for our full meeting as that is a 90 minute meeting that would interfere with the WS2 meetings that are scheduled in the 5 UTC time frame. We have been very careful to keep our scheduling out of the WS2 time tracks as that was one of the original concerns that people had in establishing our rotating scheduling. The other goal we had was consistency in the rotating times at which we held meetings as much as possible. Finally the point was the sharing of discomfort among the residents of various time frames which was accepted by the WG at the beginning of this process. At this point you are the only one with this specific request. Should there be a consensus in the group that we need to review and possibly redo the rotating schedule of meetings, I will ask the staff to help us find a new solution that is acceptable to a consensus of the participants in the WG. I will ask that the issue be added as AOB to our full meeting to find out whether there is consensus on the need to reschedule our meetings. Thank you Avri On 01-May-17 13:21, Arasteh wrote:

Avri Once again, I reiterate-my position which was supported by many European residents that the window of 03,00 UTC is a painful window for meeting . I sincerely and respectfully request you to move it to 04,00 UTC which does not make a big change for Asia Pacific people. Failure to do that is a clear sign to exclude People from Europe to attend Regards Kavouss

Sent from my iPhone

...

On 20 Apr 2017, at 00:18, avri doria <avri@apc.org<mailto:avri@apc.org>> wrote:

Hi,

I want to append a comment to this. While I fully support the extension, I want to encourage people to submit their comments as soon as they can. As most of you know the sub teams are currently working on all these issues and the sooner they get input, the better. Everyone in the leadership group is waiting with bated breath and is eager to see the answers that are ready. Also want to note, that there are many questions, and there is no barrier to submitting multiple responses dealing the variety of questions. Also those who submit early will have the opportunity for making further comments should they think of new elements to add to their answers.

So please, though we are recommending an extension, please feel free to submit the work that is already ready.

Thanks

avri

...

On 18-Apr-17 05:11, Jeff Neuman wrote:

All,

Last week the Avri and I received a formal request from the Governmental Advisory Committee to “consider an extension of the deadline for public comments to the Community Comment 2 (CC2) questionnaire.” In light of the extensive nature of the questionnaire as well as the desire to get as many responses as possible, Avri and I are inclined to agree to this request. In order to be fair, we believe the extension should be applied to everyone, not just the GAC.

Working backwards, it is our desire to have a summary of all of the public comments to discuss at ICANN59 at the end of June. The document deadline for that meeting is 15 business days prior to the meeting (beginning of June). In order to give staff some time to compile the summary in time for the document deadline, we are proposing *May 22, 2017* as the new date for comments to be due. This would be a 3 week extension for the entire community.

I know this is asking for quick turnaround, but please let us know by no later than *April 20^th *if you have any strong objections to this proposal. Otherwise, we will let the community know about the extension on April 21^st .

Best regards,

*Jeffrey J. Neuman*

*Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA***| *Com Laude USA*

1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600

Mclean, VA 22102, United States

E: _jeff.neuman@valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com> <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com>>_or _jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>>_

T: +1.703.635.7514<tel:%2B1.703.635.7514>

M: +1.202.549.5079<tel:%2B1.202.549.5079>

@Jintlaw

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg ________________________________ 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.

To the New gTTLD subsequent procedure PDP WG At this point since the notes from Kavouss seem abusive to me, since my motives have been attacked and since I have been accused of trying to prevent GAC participation, I have no choice other than to turn this issue over to the Ombudsman. The only other alternative I can think of is to accept the fact that I am incapable of co-chairing this group and step down. I am considering this but will wait until the ombudsman has a chance to review the issue and determine my culpability for the things I am being accused of. Thanks and apologies avri On 01-May-17 20:40, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:

Avri, I check the schedule of CCWG Accountability for the month of May and found that one Tuesday 16 May , they have Jurisdiction meeting at 05,00 UTC thus other Tuesday they do niot have any meeting at that time. I therefore request to be collaborative and change the timing of your General Meeting to 04,00 UTC and ask CCWG Jurisdiction to shift their meeting by Half an hour to start at 05,30 not to have any clash with your meeting .As they meet for only 60 minutes still they end by 06,30 UTC at that only one meeting per night. If you insist , I interpret that this is an effort to EXCLUDE GAC TO ATTEND THE PDP. I will formally announce that to the responsible group. You and staff need to kindly work it out in consultation with Bernie. I insist on that. Regards Kavouss

2017-05-01 20:59 GMT+02:00 avri doria <avri@apc.org <mailto:avri@apc.org>>:

Dear Kavouss,

I have received heard your requests and seen your complaint to the chairs of the GNSO and the GAC.

Staff reviewed our meeting time and found that 4 UTC was not possible, especially for our full meeting as that is a 90 minute meeting that would interfere with the WS2 meetings that are scheduled in the 5 UTC time frame. We have been very careful to keep our scheduling out of the WS2 time tracks as that was one of the original concerns that people had in establishing our rotating scheduling. The other goal we had was consistency in the rotating times at which we held meetings as much as possible. Finally the point was the sharing of discomfort among the residents of various time frames which was accepted by the WG at the beginning of this process.

At this point you are the only one with this specific request. Should there be a consensus in the group that we need to review and possibly redo the rotating schedule of meetings, I will ask the staff to help us find a new solution that is acceptable to a consensus of the participants in the WG. I will ask that the issue be added as AOB to our full meeting to find out whether there is consensus on the need to reschedule our meetings.

Thank you

Avri

On 01-May-17 13:21, Arasteh wrote: > Avri > Once again, I reiterate-my position which was supported by many European residents that the window of 03,00 UTC is a painful window for meeting . > I sincerely and respectfully request you to move it to 04,00 UTC which does not make a big change for Asia Pacific people. Failure to do that is a clear sign to exclude People from Europe to attend > Regards > Kavouss > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 20 Apr 2017, at 00:18, avri doria <avri@apc.org <mailto:avri@apc.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I want to append a comment to this. While I fully support the >> extension, I want to encourage people to submit their comments as soon >> as they can. As most of you know the sub teams are currently working on >> all these issues and the sooner they get input, the better. Everyone in >> the leadership group is waiting with bated breath and is eager to see >> the answers that are ready. Also want to note, that there are many >> questions, and there is no barrier to submitting multiple responses >> dealing the variety of questions. Also those who submit early will have >> the opportunity for making further comments should they think of new >> elements to add to their answers. >> >> So please, though we are recommending an extension, please feel free to >> submit the work that is already ready. >> >> Thanks >> >> avri >> >> >> >>> On 18-Apr-17 05:11, Jeff Neuman wrote: >>> >>> All, >>> >>> >>> >>> Last week the Avri and I received a formal request from the >>> Governmental Advisory Committee to “consider an extension of the >>> deadline for public comments to the Community Comment 2 (CC2) >>> questionnaire.” In light of the extensive nature of the questionnaire >>> as well as the desire to get as many responses as possible, Avri and I >>> are inclined to agree to this request. In order to be fair, we >>> believe the extension should be applied to everyone, not just the GAC. >>> >>> >>> >>> Working backwards, it is our desire to have a summary of all of the >>> public comments to discuss at ICANN59 at the end of June. The >>> document deadline for that meeting is 15 business days prior to the >>> meeting (beginning of June). In order to give staff some time to >>> compile the summary in time for the document deadline, we are >>> proposing *May 22, 2017* as the new date for comments to be due. This >>> would be a 3 week extension for the entire community. >>> >>> >>> >>> I know this is asking for quick turnaround, but please let us know by >>> no later than *April 20^th *if you have any strong objections to this >>> proposal. Otherwise, we will let the community know about the >>> extension on April 21^st . >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> *Jeffrey J. Neuman* >>> >>> *Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA***| *Com Laude USA* >>> >>> 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600 >>> >>> Mclean, VA 22102, United States >>> >>> E: _jeff.neuman@valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com> <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com>>_or >>> _jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>>_ >>> >>> T: +1.703.635.7514 <tel:%2B1.703.635.7514> >>> >>> M: +1.202.549.5079 <tel:%2B1.202.549.5079> >>> >>> @Jintlaw >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list >>> Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg> >> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list >> Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg> >

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Pardon me for running behind on this one. But I have somehow lost trac and left behind with so much happening and the time zone (lapse). IMO, Kavouss GAC is more than welcomed to participate. But it is the right and the opportunity for the Chairs / Co-Chais to choose when and How - as "Visiting Lecturers” or May choose to sit in all the time. Leave Politics to Trump and the related people, and treat GAC as officers of the Systems. We take their inputs and opinions, and let them move on with their larger tasks. Its good to be vociferous, but not for the wrong things. cheers -Vaibhav Aggarwal New Delhi www.VaibhavAggarwal.com

On May 2, 2017, at 8:17 AM, avri doria <avri@apc.org> wrote:

To the New gTTLD subsequent procedure PDP WG

At this point since the notes from Kavouss seem abusive to me, since my motives have been attacked and since I have been accused of trying to prevent GAC participation, I have no choice other than to turn this issue over to the Ombudsman.

The only other alternative I can think of is to accept the fact that I am incapable of co-chairing this group and step down. I am considering this but will wait until the ombudsman has a chance to review the issue and determine my culpability for the things I am being accused of.

Thanks and apologies

avri

On 01-May-17 20:40, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:

...

Avri, I check the schedule of CCWG Accountability for the month of May and found that one Tuesday 16 May , they have Jurisdiction meeting at 05,00 UTC thus other Tuesday they do niot have any meeting at that time. I therefore request to be collaborative and change the timing of your General Meeting to 04,00 UTC and ask CCWG Jurisdiction to shift their meeting by Half an hour to start at 05,30 not to have any clash with your meeting .As they meet for only 60 minutes still they end by 06,30 UTC at that only one meeting per night. If you insist , I interpret that this is an effort to EXCLUDE GAC TO ATTEND THE PDP. I will formally announce that to the responsible group. You and staff need to kindly work it out in consultation with Bernie. I insist on that. Regards Kavouss

2017-05-01 20:59 GMT+02:00 avri doria <avri@apc.org <mailto:avri@apc.org>>:

Dear Kavouss,

I have received heard your requests and seen your complaint to the chairs of the GNSO and the GAC.

Staff reviewed our meeting time and found that 4 UTC was not possible, especially for our full meeting as that is a 90 minute meeting that would interfere with the WS2 meetings that are scheduled in the 5 UTC time frame. We have been very careful to keep our scheduling out of the WS2 time tracks as that was one of the original concerns that people had in establishing our rotating scheduling. The other goal we had was consistency in the rotating times at which we held meetings as much as possible. Finally the point was the sharing of discomfort among the residents of various time frames which was accepted by the WG at the beginning of this process.

At this point you are the only one with this specific request. Should there be a consensus in the group that we need to review and possibly redo the rotating schedule of meetings, I will ask the staff to help us find a new solution that is acceptable to a consensus of the participants in the WG. I will ask that the issue be added as AOB to our full meeting to find out whether there is consensus on the need to reschedule our meetings.

Thank you

Avri

On 01-May-17 13:21, Arasteh wrote:

...

Avri Once again, I reiterate-my position which was supported by many European residents that the window of 03,00 UTC is a painful window for meeting . I sincerely and respectfully request you to move it to 04,00 UTC which does not make a big change for Asia Pacific people. Failure to do that is a clear sign to exclude People from Europe to attend Regards Kavouss

Sent from my iPhone

...

On 20 Apr 2017, at 00:18, avri doria <avri@apc.org <mailto:avri@apc.org>> wrote:

Hi,

I want to append a comment to this. While I fully support the extension, I want to encourage people to submit their comments as soon as they can. As most of you know the sub teams are currently working on all these issues and the sooner they get input, the better. Everyone in the leadership group is waiting with bated breath and is eager to see the answers that are ready. Also want to note, that there are many questions, and there is no barrier to submitting multiple responses dealing the variety of questions. Also those who submit early will have the opportunity for making further comments should they think of new elements to add to their answers.

So please, though we are recommending an extension, please feel free to submit the work that is already ready.

Thanks

avri

...

On 18-Apr-17 05:11, Jeff Neuman wrote:

All,

Last week the Avri and I received a formal request from the Governmental Advisory Committee to “consider an extension of the deadline for public comments to the Community Comment 2 (CC2) questionnaire.” In light of the extensive nature of the questionnaire as well as the desire to get as many responses as possible, Avri and I are inclined to agree to this request. In order to be fair, we believe the extension should be applied to everyone, not just the GAC.

Working backwards, it is our desire to have a summary of all of the public comments to discuss at ICANN59 at the end of June. The document deadline for that meeting is 15 business days prior to the meeting (beginning of June). In order to give staff some time to compile the summary in time for the document deadline, we are proposing *May 22, 2017* as the new date for comments to be due. This would be a 3 week extension for the entire community.

I know this is asking for quick turnaround, but please let us know by no later than *April 20^th *if you have any strong objections to this proposal. Otherwise, we will let the community know about the extension on April 21^st .

Best regards,

*Jeffrey J. Neuman*

*Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA***| *Com Laude USA*

1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600

Mclean, VA 22102, United States

E: _jeff.neuman@valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com> <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com>>_or _jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>>_

T: +1.703.635.7514 <tel:%2B1.703.635.7514>

M: +1.202.549.5079 <tel:%2B1.202.549.5079>

@Jintlaw

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg>

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg>

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg