Jeff, unfortunately this meeting coincides with an ICANN update on GDPR and related subjects so I will miss the first hour. I agree with Jim. We may need a delay, all the more so because this is a holiday weekend for some. Alan At 08/10/2018 09:39 AM, Jeff Neuman wrote:

All,

We can discuss further on our call in a few hours, but the release of a Supplemental Initial Report does not in any way mean that additional discussions cannot take place about any of the options. We are working on getting some additional data and have reached out to several of the providers of private auction services to get some data (if possible).

One of the providers has responded so far indicating a willingness to discuss certain ideas for improvements that they have, but we are need to work out scheduling issues. Although they are willing to discuss ideas for improvements, they have not indicated that they are at liberty to disclose any data due to confidentiality concerns.

Again, we do not see a reason at this point to hold up the comment period on the Supplemental Initial Report. Remember, one of the purposes of releasing the Supplemental Initial Report is to try and get additional data points.

Best regards,

Jeff Neuman Senior Vice President

Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive Suite 600, McLean VA 22102, USA

D: +1.703.635.7514 T: +44 (0) 20 7421 8250 E: jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <http://www.comlaude.com>www.comlaude.com

Liability cannot be accepted for statements made which are clearly the sender’s own and not made on behalf of Com Laude USA or Valideus USA. This message is intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to us, and immediately and permanently delete it. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.Com Laude USA and Valideus are trading names of Consonum, Inc.

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Justine Chew Sent: Sunday, October 7, 2018 9:07 AM To: jim@galwaysg.com; gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 8 October 2018 at 15:00 UTC

I don't disagree with Jim.

In fact, spending a bit more time to flesh out Sarah's "draw" mechanism could prove useful, and as may getting feedback from ICANN Legal on whether there might be impediments to prohibiting non-ICANN private auctions.

Justine Chew -----

On Sat, 6 Oct 2018 at 19:34, Jim Prendergast <<mailto:jim@galwaysg.com>jim@galwaysg.com> wrote: Cheryl and Jeff

I understand from the last call that it’s your intent to wrap up discussion on the supplemental interim report on Monday’s call and finalize the report soon thereafter. While that timeline made sense a week ago, I’m not so sure it does now.

In the last week, there have been three developments that I think warrant further deliberation:

1) There has been renewed discussion around contention resolution via auctions (private or ICANN). And it continues. It’s brought more voices (new and dormant) into the debate and as a result we have more issues that are being worked into the document. This is a good thing as we want to present as many options to the community as possible. The document is better because of that. 2) The comment period on the initial report closed and while I haven’t been through all of them yet, I have seen a few instances where the issue of auctions was raised. For example: Some members of the RYSG and the ALAC said the legality of private auctions should be discussed. The ICANN Board said that they had concerns around private auctions and how they can be reconciled with ICANN’s commitments and core values. I think we need to get more clarity from the Board on that. The IPC asked for a study on abuse of private auctions to take place before it could make a full determination 3) Related to the last bullet point, as part of our deliberations, there was supposed to be outreach to auction providers to determine if there were additional instances of irregularities. We haven’t had an update on that recently, but the results of that outreach need to be in this report otherwise it is incomplete.

We as a group would be remiss if we proceeded to another public comment period without looking at those comments and try to determine how they should be reflected in this document before us. As many of us know, a lot of time, energy and effort was put into those and for this group to not even consider them in this document would send a terrible message.

As you said when asking for liaisons, comments from SGs and ACs hold more weight than individual comments so we should give them such deference.

I understand this might lead to delaying releasing the interim till after Barcelona, but the reality is no one outside this group will be looking at it leading into and during the meeting. There is too much other material to digest prepping for and during the meeting.

Curious to hear what others think.

Thanks

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org>gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Steve Chan Sent: Friday, October 05, 2018 5:42 PM To: <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 8 October 2018 at 15:00 UTC

Dear WG Members,

Please find the proposed agenda for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting scheduled for 8 October 2018 at 15:00 UTC, for 90 minutes.

Agenda review/SOIs Supplemental Report: Review of sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 continued Planning for ICANN63 AOB

For agenda item 2, please find the latest draft, which accepted all red-lined edits made prior to the 2 October meeting (you can find that draft here: <https://community.icann.org/x/4QirBQ>https://community.icann.org/x/4QirBQ). As it was anticipated that changes would be non-trivial, it was believed that accepting red-lines prior to making new proposed edits would improve the readability of this latest draft.

For Item 3, we will further discuss plans for the sessions scheduled for day 1 of ICANN63, Saturday 20 October (see the published schedule here: <https://63.schedule.icann.org/meetings>https://63.schedule.icann.org/meetings).

Those signed up as Members to this PDP WG should have received meeting information from the SOAC Support team. If you did not receive these participation details or if you would like to send your apologies, please contact the SOAC Support team (<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>gnso-secs@icann.org).

Best, Steve 2

Steven Chan
 Policy Director, GNSO Support

ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Offic

e Telephone: +1.310.301.5800 Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649

Find out more about the GNSO by taking our <https://learn.icann.org/>interactive courses and visiting the <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>GNSO Newcomer pages.

Follow @GNSO on Twitter: <https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO>https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: <https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/>https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ <http://gnso.icann.org/en/>http://gnso.icann.org/en/

_______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>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