The RDS PDP session starts at 16.00 this afternoon. From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Kris Seeburn Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 9:11 AM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me Kris On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote: Kris, Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday? Chuck _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

We could have looked at you if that is all you need Kris! 😊 Hope all is well. Chuck From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me Kris On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> > <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> > wrote: Kris, Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday? Chuck _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

Glad to hear that Kris. Chuck From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:25 AM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Am back i was given a treatment for an infection and now am on antibiotics and pain killers. I will be in the 4 PM meeting. Just attending another meeting right now…but have already set apology for 4 PM. See you in a few. On Nov 1, 2017, at 14:20, <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> > <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> > wrote: We could have looked at you if that is all you need Kris! 😊 Hope all is well. Chuck From: Kris Seeburn [ <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com> mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> consult@cgomes.com Cc: <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me Kris On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, < <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> consult@cgomes.com> < <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> consult@cgomes.com> wrote: Kris, Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday? Chuck _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com> * <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/> www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/

Bastiaan, I think this is the latest; someone can correct me if I am wrong. If anyone has new edits, I recommend you accept the edits before adding your new ones in redline. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Bastiaan Goslings [mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:36 AM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>; Kris Seeburn <seeburn.k@gmail.com>; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Yep, good to hear that you’re ok, Kris! I hope you guys don’t mind me asking, but can someone please forward the latest version of the DT5 purpose doc that we are meant to provide an update on this afternoon? Since a google-doc was not used (?), and I cannot find the latest draft in the email-swamp I’m facing… thanks ;-) Bastiaan

On 1 Nov 2017, at 14:27, consult@cgomes.com wrote:

Glad to hear that Kris.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:25 AM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Am back i was given a treatment for an infection and now am on antibiotics and pain killers. I will be in the 4 PM meeting. Just attending another meeting right now…but have already set apology for 4 PM.

See you in a few.

...

On Nov 1, 2017, at 14:20, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

We could have looked at you if that is all you need Kris! 😊 Hope all is well.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me

Kris

On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

...

Kris,

Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday?

Chuck

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com • www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/

<image001.gif>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

All, the easiest way to step through the email exchanged by this team is your DT mailing list archive: Http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/ It appears from that email archive that the latest version of your working document is (maintained in Word format: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/attachments/20171031/d68aa0b0/D... Regards Lisa -----Original Message----- From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bastiaan Goslings Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 2:36 PM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Yep, good to hear that you’re ok, Kris! I hope you guys don’t mind me asking, but can someone please forward the latest version of the DT5 purpose doc that we are meant to provide an update on this afternoon? Since a google-doc was not used (?), and I cannot find the latest draft in the email-swamp I’m facing… thanks ;-) Bastiaan

On 1 Nov 2017, at 14:27, consult@cgomes.com wrote:

Glad to hear that Kris.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:25 AM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Am back i was given a treatment for an infection and now am on antibiotics and pain killers. I will be in the 4 PM meeting. Just attending another meeting right now…but have already set apology for 4 PM.

See you in a few.

...

On Nov 1, 2017, at 14:20, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

We could have looked at you if that is all you need Kris! 😊 Hope all is well.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me

Kris

On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

...

Kris,

Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday?

Chuck

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com • www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/

<image001.gif>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

Steve It is your document edits which we will use going on. I sent the same to all. I think as we get out of the meeting here we will definitely re review and make this msg aligned. But what I was referring to was your document edits. Kris

On 1 Nov 2017, at 16:55, Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com> wrote:

OK, I am now completely confused, since neither the link Lisa provides nor the one Chuck provides reflects the bifurcation of legal and regulatory enforcement into separate documents, which Chuck just now stated in the RDS meeting has been done. I believe the most recent iteration of that approach was the one I circulated around 4 pm EDT (midnight AD time) which I attach here. However it is quite possible I have missed something overnight……

Steve

<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Phifer Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 6:55 AM To: 'Bastiaan Goslings'; consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

All, the easiest way to step through the email exchanged by this team is your DT mailing list archive: Http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/

It appears from that email archive that the latest version of your working document is (maintained in Word format: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/attachments/20171031/d68aa0b0/D...

Regards Lisa

-----Original Message----- From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bastiaan Goslings Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 2:36 PM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Yep, good to hear that you’re ok, Kris!

I hope you guys don’t mind me asking, but can someone please forward the latest version of the DT5 purpose doc that we are meant to provide an update on this afternoon? Since a google-doc was not used (?), and I cannot find the latest draft in the email-swamp I’m facing…

thanks ;-) Bastiaan

...

On 1 Nov 2017, at 14:27, consult@cgomes.com wrote:

Glad to hear that Kris.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:25 AM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Am back i was given a treatment for an infection and now am on antibiotics and pain killers. I will be in the 4 PM meeting. Just attending another meeting right now…but have already set apology for 4 PM.

See you in a few.

...

On Nov 1, 2017, at 14:20, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

We could have looked at you if that is all you need Kris! 😊 Hope all is well.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me

Kris

On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

...

Kris,

Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday?

Chuck

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com • www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/

<image001.gif>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <Seeburn draft 103117 contractual (9439160).docx> <SJM atop CG edits re regulatory (9440256).docx> _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be finding a way to work with the team who have worked on “Legal” and i think we may need at some point work with the “investigation” team which in reality also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions. They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But that would be a later stage approach. I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid out as an appendix to each document. Another area that we may add at a later stage is “new gtld auction proceeds” they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.

On Nov 2, 2017, at 08:13, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

I think I created the confusion by mixing up the two DTs that I am coordinating. To try to eliminate the confusion I created two new redline versions that are attached. For the Regulatory Purpose I accepted the previous edits made and added some new ones. For the Contractual Enforcement Purpose I left the previous redlined edits and added some of my own.

For both documents, please check what I did to ensure that it is okay and feel free to add additional redlined edits as well as comments/questions.

Chuck

  <> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com>] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 5:56 AM To: 'lisa@corecom.com <mailto:lisa@corecom.com>' <lisa@corecom.com <mailto:lisa@corecom.com>>; 'Bastiaan Goslings' <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net <mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>>; consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

OK, I am now completely confused, since neither the link Lisa provides nor the one Chuck provides reflects the bifurcation of legal and regulatory enforcement into separate documents, which Chuck just now stated in the RDS meeting has been done. I believe the most recent iteration of that approach was the one I circulated around 4 pm EDT (midnight AD time) which I attach here. However it is quite possible I have missed something overnight……

Steve

<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Lisa Phifer Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 6:55 AM To: 'Bastiaan Goslings'; consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

All, the easiest way to step through the email exchanged by this team is your DT mailing list archive: Http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/ <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/>

It appears from that email archive that the latest version of your working document is (maintained in Word format: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/attachments/20171031/d68aa0b0/D... <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/attachments/20171031/d68aa0b0/D...>

Regards Lisa

-----Original Message----- From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Bastiaan Goslings Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 2:36 PM To: consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Yep, good to hear that you’re ok, Kris!

I hope you guys don’t mind me asking, but can someone please forward the latest version of the DT5 purpose doc that we are meant to provide an update on this afternoon? Since a google-doc was not used (?), and I cannot find the latest draft in the email-swamp I’m facing…

thanks ;-) Bastiaan

...

On 1 Nov 2017, at 14:27, consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

Glad to hear that Kris.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com>] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:25 AM To: consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Am back i was given a treatment for an infection and now am on antibiotics and pain killers. I will be in the 4 PM meeting. Just attending another meeting right now…but have already set apology for 4 PM.

See you in a few.

...

On Nov 1, 2017, at 14:20, <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> wrote:

We could have looked at you if that is all you need Kris! 😊 Hope all is well.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com>] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me

Kris

On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> wrote:

...

Kris,

Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday?

Chuck

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com> • www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>

<image001.gif>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5><DT5 Regulatory Purpose - New redline as of 2 Nov 17 - 8 am GST.docx><DT5 Contactual Enforcement Purpose - New redline as of 2 Nov 17 - 8 am GST.docx>_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>

Suggest beth who is very good at the google docs. Please upload the documents and Bastiaan you could have your input directly there. I think going forward it is gona help a lot and also working with the other teams. There documents and some may just overlap so i think we will need to be rationalizing by before the 14th November meeting.

On Nov 2, 2017, at 10:14, Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> wrote:

Thanks, Kris

@all: I do not feel comfortable editing in the Word docs as that just creates confusion (at least fro me) in terms of what the latest version is we’re working on.

Anyway. Some comments with regard to the ‘contractual enforcement’ draft that was attached to the message below:

Definition:

- ’information collected to enable ICANN compliance’: information collected by who? - what/who exactly is ICANN compliance? - the way I read the definition as is it implies that ICANN Compliance is involved in ‘resolving issues of compliance arising from private party contracts’. That is not want we are to say right? - I would take out the ‘private party contract’ here and put it e.g. in a footnote

Alternative definition, as a suggestion:

‘The obtaining of WHOIS data by ICANN Compliance to assist them in the monitoring and enforcing of agreements between contracted parties and ICANN, as well as the obtaining of public available WHOIS data by private entities to help resolving issues of compliance arising from contracts between private parties’

Tasks:

- I do not understand the ‘Apart from the IP this is also used to identify the identity of the holders of domain names as a first level review. This can come from individuals or small companies’: what does that mean? What is a ‘first level review’ and why is that relevant here?

Users:

-the definition we’re using refers to in general terms to ‘private party contracts’. The list of users in the current draft seems a lot more limited IMO

Hope this is useful input,

Regards, Bastiaan

...

On 2 Nov 2017, at 09:36, Kris Seeburn <seeburn.k@gmail.com> wrote:

Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be finding a way to work with the team who have worked on “Legal” and i think we may need at some point work with the “investigation” team which in reality also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions. They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But that would be a later stage approach.

I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid out as an appendix to each document.

Another area that we may add at a later stage is “new gtld auction proceeds” they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.

<DT5 Contactual Enforcement Purpose - New redline as of 2 Nov 17 - 8 am GST.docx> <DT5 Regulatory Purpose - New redline as of 2 Nov 17 - 8 am GST.docx>

...

On Nov 2, 2017, at 08:13, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

I think I created the confusion by mixing up the two DTs that I am coordinating. To try to eliminate the confusion I created two new redline versions that are attached. For the Regulatory Purpose I accepted the previous edits made and added some new ones. For the Contractual Enforcement Purpose I left the previous redlined edits and added some of my own.

For both documents, please check what I did to ensure that it is okay and feel free to add additional redlined edits as well as comments/questions.

Chuck

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 5:56 AM To: 'lisa@corecom.com' <lisa@corecom.com>; 'Bastiaan Goslings' <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>; consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

OK, I am now completely confused, since neither the link Lisa provides nor the one Chuck provides reflects the bifurcation of legal and regulatory enforcement into separate documents, which Chuck just now stated in the RDS meeting has been done. I believe the most recent iteration of that approach was the one I circulated around 4 pm EDT (midnight AD time) which I attach here. However it is quite possible I have missed something overnight……

Steve

<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Phifer Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 6:55 AM To: 'Bastiaan Goslings'; consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

All, the easiest way to step through the email exchanged by this team is your DT mailing list archive: Http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/

It appears from that email archive that the latest version of your working document is (maintained in Word format: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/attachments/20171031/d68aa0b0/D...

Regards Lisa

-----Original Message----- From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bastiaan Goslings Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 2:36 PM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Yep, good to hear that you’re ok, Kris!

I hope you guys don’t mind me asking, but can someone please forward the latest version of the DT5 purpose doc that we are meant to provide an update on this afternoon? Since a google-doc was not used (?), and I cannot find the latest draft in the email-swamp I’m facing…

thanks ;-) Bastiaan

...

On 1 Nov 2017, at 14:27, consult@cgomes.com wrote:

Glad to hear that Kris.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:25 AM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Am back i was given a treatment for an infection and now am on antibiotics and pain killers. I will be in the 4 PM meeting. Just attending another meeting right now…but have already set apology for 4 PM.

See you in a few.

...

On Nov 1, 2017, at 14:20, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

We could have looked at you if that is all you need Kris! 😊 Hope all is well.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: consult@cgomes.com Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me

Kris

On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

...

Kris,

Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday?

Chuck

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com • www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/

<image001.gif>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <DT5 Regulatory Purpose - New redline as of 2 Nov 17 - 8 am GST.docx><DT5 Contactual Enforcement Purpose - New redline as of 2 Nov 17 - 8 am GST.docx>_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com • www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/

<KeepItOn_Social_animated.gif>

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>

Yes I wanted to add Bastiaan remark but I think he may have other things he may want to change. So I have not put in his edits. Suggest it be loaded on google docs and he can add and modify as per before his remarks. Kris

On 2 Nov 2017, at 13:48, <consult@cgomes.com> <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

Thanks Kris. Is this the latest version that should be put into Google Docs as Bastiaan suggested?

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 10:37 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> Cc: Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com>; lisa@corecom.com; Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be finding a way to work with the team who have worked on “Legal” and i think we may need at some point work with the “investigation” team which in reality also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions. They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But that would be a later stage approach.

I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid out as an appendix to each document.

Another area that we may add at a later stage is “new gtld auction proceeds” they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.

Hi chuck I just landed and going be me up till tomorrow then review. I thought long and I think that the overlaps are the connecting points but give me a few hours I will get the updates to you. Kris

On 4 Nov 2017, at 18:38, Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

I arrived home last night and am trying to catch up. Can someone please send me the latest Word versions and the links to the Google Docs for both deliverables?

Also, regarding the definitions, I have been thinking about them and suspect that some WG members will have problem with the word ‘collected’ so I suggest that we consider using the word ‘used’ instead. And for Contractual Enforcement I question whether we should refer to Private Party Contracts because ICANN Compliance does not have any enforcement ability with Private Party Contracts so I edited that. They would then read as follows:

Contractual Enforcement Information used to enable ICANN Compliance to monitor and enforce contracted parties’ agreements with ICANN, as well as resolving issues of compliance arising from issues raised by private parties.

Regulatory Information used to enable contact between the registrant and/or their designated point of contact and regulatory entities to ensure compliance with applicable laws.

Please feel free to comment on these suggested edits before our call on Monday.

Finally, here is a listing from the Wednesday meeting that summarizes our tasks: Summarize each purpose in one sentence: “Information collected to enable contact between the registrant and <who> <to accomplish what>” Think in terms of explaining to the data subject why data is being collected for this purpose – keep it concise and simple. Are the tasks/users identified by your team so diverse and distinct that they may be more than one purpose? If so, split them up and describe each purpose separately. Which purposes covered by other teams are closely related to or overlap the purpose(s) covered by your team? Is there any data collected specifically for the stated purpose? Or does that purpose use only data collected for other purposes? If anyone has thoughts about any of these items, please share them with the team; we will discuss them on our call. Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 10:37 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> Cc: Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com>; lisa@corecom.com; Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be finding a way to work with the team who have worked on “Legal” and i think we may need at some point work with the “investigation” team which in reality also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions. They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But that would be a later stage approach.

I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid out as an appendix to each document.

Another area that we may add at a later stage is “new gtld auction proceeds” they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.

Chuck’s suggested change re contractual enforcement would eliminate consideration of a number of use cases generated either by the EWG, see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf%20%2...> , pages 9, 24, 28), or by this WG in an earlier phase of our work, (see https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries...). Our earlier draft identified five examples of entities using RDS for contractual enforcement purposes: “These entities include governmental tax authorities, UDRP providers, the ICANN organization, intellectual property owners, and merchant account monitoring solution providers, among others.” Chuck’s proposed change would move the first of these to the regulatory enforcement category (I support that), but would eliminate the second, fourth and fifth examples. It would recognize the contractual enforcement use only when ICANN was a party to the contract (the third example). Chuck, if your point is that these uses fit better under “legal actions” than under “contractual enforcement,” then I would be OK with that so long as they are explicitly addressed under “legal actions.” I think they fit better under “contract enforcement” because they in fact involve enforcement of contracts; but if the investigation supported by RDS data indicates a breach of contract, then the result may be a “legal action,” i.e., a lawsuit. I would be quite concerned however if these important uses were not captured either in “contract enforcement” nor in “legal actions.” Maybe Chuck or Lisa could advise us whether that is or is not the case. Steve Metalitz [image001] Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com<http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU. From: Chuck [mailto:consult@cgomes.com] Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2017 10:39 AM To: 'Kris Seeburn' Cc: Metalitz, Steven; lisa@corecom.com; 'Bastiaan Goslings'; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Importance: High I arrived home last night and am trying to catch up. Can someone please send me the latest Word versions and the links to the Google Docs for both deliverables? Also, regarding the definitions, I have been thinking about them and suspect that some WG members will have problem with the word ‘collected’ so I suggest that we consider using the word ‘used’ instead. And for Contractual Enforcement I question whether we should refer to Private Party Contracts because ICANN Compliance does not have any enforcement ability with Private Party Contracts so I edited that. They would then read as follows: Contractual Enforcement Information used to enable ICANN Compliance to monitor and enforce contracted parties’ agreements with ICANN, as well as resolving issues of compliance arising from issues raised by private parties. Regulatory Information used to enable contact between the registrant and/or their designated point of contact and regulatory entities to ensure compliance with applicable laws. Please feel free to comment on these suggested edits before our call on Monday. Finally, here is a listing from the Wednesday meeting that summarizes our tasks: o Summarize each purpose in one sentence: “Information collected to enable contact between the registrant and <who> <to accomplish what>” o Think in terms of explaining to the data subject why data is being collected for this purpose – keep it concise and simple. o Are the tasks/users identified by your team so diverse and distinct that they may be more than one purpose? If so, split them up and describe each purpose separately. o Which purposes covered by other teams are closely related to or overlap the purpose(s) covered by your team? o Is there any data collected specifically for the stated purpose? Or does that purpose use only data collected for other purposes? If anyone has thoughts about any of these items, please share them with the team; we will discuss them on our call. Chuck From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 10:37 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> Cc: Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com>>; lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>; Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net<mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>>; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org<mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be finding a way to work with the team who have worked on “Legal” and i think we may need at some point work with the “investigation” team which in reality also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions. They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But that would be a later stage approach. I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid out as an appendix to each document. Another area that we may add at a later stage is “new gtld auction proceeds” they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.

Thanks very much for the feedback Bastiaan. I personally think that changing 'information' to 'data' would be fine but I will leave it up to the team to decide that. Maybe we should say 'RDS data' because that is what we are talking about. Also, the team should decide whether to use the term 'obtain' or 'use' or 'collect'. The reason I suggested not using 'collect' is because some in the WG have stated that ICANN's mission does not include collecting data for reasons not directly related to its mission, while at the same time indicating that it might be okay to use the collected information such as legal actions. 'ICANN Compliance' (with a capital C) was intended to refer to the ICANN Compliance Department because it is the department that enforces the terms of ICANN's agreements with registries and registrars. So, yes, it refers to 'ICANN Contractual Compliance' and it would be fine to say it that way. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Bastiaan Goslings [mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net] Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:42 PM To: Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com> Cc: Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>; Chuck <consult@cgomes.com>; Kris Seeburn <seeburn.k@gmail.com>; lisa@corecom.com; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Hi all, I will try to follow up on Steve’s comments later - but quickly before I head off to Abu D airport: I gather from Chuck’s comments that I am not the only one struggling with latest and authoritative versions/locations of our draft-work ;-) Anyway. I agree with not using the term ‘collected’, and that is why I suggested using ‘obtaining’ in stead. I am not an English native speaker so whether it can/should be ‘used’ I will leave to the rest of the group. Mind you, I came up with ‘obtaining WHOIS data’. It might seem a detail, but IMO ‘data’ is more appropriate than ‘information’ here. Data become information afterwards, i.e. the purpose that the WHOIS-data are used for determines what information is extracted from them. Or something like that. I furthermore asked what we mean with ‘ICANN Compliance’: I am relatively new to this but it seems to me here too we need to be (more) specific. Are we talking a process, an e.g. department? A search on the website gives me (ICANN) ‘Contractual Compliance’. Is that what we are referring to? https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/about-2014-10-10-en -Bastiaan

On 5 Nov 2017, at 01:32, Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com> wrote:

Chuck’s suggested change re contractual enforcement would eliminate consideration of a number of use cases generated either by the EWG, see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf , pages 9, 24, 28), or by this WG in an earlier phase of our work, (seehttps://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries...).

Our earlier draft identified five examples of entities using RDS for contractual enforcement purposes: “These entities include governmental tax authorities, UDRP providers, the ICANN organization, intellectual property owners, and merchant account monitoring solution providers, among others.”

Chuck’s proposed change would move the first of these to the regulatory enforcement category (I support that), but would eliminate the second, fourth and fifth examples. It would recognize the contractual enforcement use only when ICANN was a party to the contract (the third example).

Chuck, if your point is that these uses fit better under “legal actions” than under “contractual enforcement,” then I would be OK with that so long as they are explicitly addressed under “legal actions.” I think they fit better under “contract enforcement” because they in fact involve enforcement of contracts; but if the investigation supported by RDS data indicates a breach of contract, then the result may be a “legal action,” i.e., a lawsuit.

I would be quite concerned however if these important uses were not captured either in “contract enforcement” nor in “legal actions.” Maybe Chuck or Lisa could advise us whether that is or is not the case.

Steve Metalitz

<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: Chuck [mailto:consult@cgomes.com] Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2017 10:39 AM To: 'Kris Seeburn' Cc: Metalitz, Steven; lisa@corecom.com; 'Bastiaan Goslings'; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Importance: High

I arrived home last night and am trying to catch up. Can someone please send me the latest Word versions and the links to the Google Docs for both deliverables?

Also, regarding the definitions, I have been thinking about them and suspect that some WG members will have problem with the word ‘collected’ so I suggest that we consider using the word ‘used’ instead. And for Contractual Enforcement I question whether we should refer to Private Party Contracts because ICANN Compliance does not have any enforcement ability with Private Party Contracts so I edited that. They would then read as follows:

Contractual Enforcement Information used to enable ICANN Compliance to monitor and enforce contracted parties’ agreements with ICANN, as well as resolving issues of compliance arising from issues raised by private parties.

Regulatory Information used to enable contact between the registrant and/or their designated point of contact and regulatory entities to ensure compliance with applicable laws.

Please feel free to comment on these suggested edits before our call on Monday.

Finally, here is a listing from the Wednesday meeting that summarizes our tasks: o Summarize each purpose in one sentence: “Information collected to enable contact between the registrant and <who> <to accomplish what>” o Think in terms of explaining to the data subject why data is being collected for this purpose – keep it concise and simple. o Are the tasks/users identified by your team so diverse and distinct that they may be more than one purpose? If so, split them up and describe each purpose separately. o Which purposes covered by other teams are closely related to or overlap the purpose(s) covered by your team? o Is there any data collected specifically for the stated purpose? Or does that purpose use only data collected for other purposes? If anyone has thoughts about any of these items, please share them with the team; we will discuss them on our call. Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 10:37 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com> Cc: Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com>; lisa@corecom.com; Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>;GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be finding a way to work with the team who have worked on “Legal” and i think we may need at some point work with the “investigation” team which in reality also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions. They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But that would be a later stage approach.

I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid out as an appendix to each document.

Another area that we may add at a later stage is “new gtld auction proceeds” they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.

Thanks for the very helpful feedback Steve. My intent was not to eliminate any use cases but rather to differentiate between Regulatory action and Contractual Enforcement. I don’t think that third parties enforce the agreements, but they can and are a source that assists ICANN Contractual Compliance so maybe we need to word it in a way that includes that. As I said in a different email a few days ago, the DT5 team (Regulatory or Contractual Enforcement) suggested that the Regulatory & Legal Actions purposes could be combined into one. How do DT5 team members feel about that? Note that I put that on the agenda for our call tomorrow. I am happy to see that my edits generated discussion. In the end the team needs to decide what to do, not me. Steve – if you want to revise the language to deal with any of these issues, I think that would be very helpful before our call tomorrow. And please do not feel obliged to use my edits. Chuck From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com] Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 2:33 PM To: 'Chuck' <consult@cgomes.com>; 'Kris Seeburn' <seeburn.k@gmail.com> Cc: lisa@corecom.com; 'Bastiaan Goslings' <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Chuck’s suggested change re contractual enforcement would eliminate consideration of a number of use cases generated either by the EWG, see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf%20%2...> , pages 9, 24, 28), or by this WG in an earlier phase of our work, (see https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries... <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries...> &modificationDate=1470109106000&api=v2). Our earlier draft identified five examples of entities using RDS for contractual enforcement purposes: “These entities include governmental tax authorities, UDRP providers, the ICANN organization, intellectual property owners, and merchant account monitoring solution providers, among others.” Chuck’s proposed change would move the first of these to the regulatory enforcement category (I support that), but would eliminate the second, fourth and fifth examples. It would recognize the contractual enforcement use only when ICANN was a party to the contract (the third example). Chuck, if your point is that these uses fit better under “legal actions” than under “contractual enforcement,” then I would be OK with that so long as they are explicitly addressed under “legal actions.” I think they fit better under “contract enforcement” because they in fact involve enforcement of contracts; but if the investigation supported by RDS data indicates a breach of contract, then the result may be a “legal action,” i.e., a lawsuit. I would be quite concerned however if these important uses were not captured either in “contract enforcement” nor in “legal actions.” Maybe Chuck or Lisa could advise us whether that is or is not the case. Steve Metalitz Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | <mailto:met@msk.com> met@msk.com Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | <http://www.msk.com/> www.msk.com 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU. From: Chuck [ <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> mailto:consult@cgomes.com] Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2017 10:39 AM To: 'Kris Seeburn' Cc: Metalitz, Steven; <mailto:lisa@corecom.com> lisa@corecom.com; 'Bastiaan Goslings'; <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Importance: High I arrived home last night and am trying to catch up. Can someone please send me the latest Word versions and the links to the Google Docs for both deliverables? Also, regarding the definitions, I have been thinking about them and suspect that some WG members will have problem with the word ‘collected’ so I suggest that we consider using the word ‘used’ instead. And for Contractual Enforcement I question whether we should refer to Private Party Contracts because ICANN Compliance does not have any enforcement ability with Private Party Contracts so I edited that. They would then read as follows: Contractual Enforcement Information used to enable ICANN Compliance to monitor and enforce contracted parties’ agreements with ICANN, as well as resolving issues of compliance arising from issues raised by private parties. Regulatory Information used to enable contact between the registrant and/or their designated point of contact and regulatory entities to ensure compliance with applicable laws. Please feel free to comment on these suggested edits before our call on Monday. Finally, here is a listing from the Wednesday meeting that summarizes our tasks: o Summarize each purpose in one sentence: “Information collected to enable contact between the registrant and <who> <to accomplish what>” o Think in terms of explaining to the data subject why data is being collected for this purpose – keep it concise and simple. o Are the tasks/users identified by your team so diverse and distinct that they may be more than one purpose? If so, split them up and describe each purpose separately. o Which purposes covered by other teams are closely related to or overlap the purpose(s) covered by your team? o Is there any data collected specifically for the stated purpose? Or does that purpose use only data collected for other purposes? If anyone has thoughts about any of these items, please share them with the team; we will discuss them on our call. Chuck From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 10:37 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> > Cc: Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> >; lisa@corecom.com <mailto:lisa@corecom.com> ; Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net <mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> >; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be finding a way to work with the team who have worked on “Legal” and i think we may need at some point work with the “investigation” team which in reality also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions. They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But that would be a later stage approach. I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid out as an appendix to each document. Another area that we may add at a later stage is “new gtld auction proceeds” they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.

Chuck, per discussion just now in DT 5, here are the use cases we are EXCLUDING from the contractual compliance paper (now to be re-named ICANN Contractual Compliance), and that should be picked up as use cases in the Legal Actions paper: use cases generated either by the EWG, see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf%20%2...> , pages 9, 24, 28), or by this WG in an earlier phase of our work, (see https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries...); and also the following developed during our deliberations: Using registration data to seek to ascertain the identity and location of the operator (or domain name registrant responsible for) a website on which A’s intellectual property rights are being exercised. For example, this could involve use of A’s trademark in logos displayed on the site; offers for sale of merchandise bearing A’s trademark; making available for download or streaming movies or sound recordings for which A holds the copyright; etc. This is a necessary first step to determining whether the operator (or registrant) is a licensee with respect to the intellectual property in question, and if so, whether the use of the intellectual property exceeds the scope of the license (e.g., because of territorial restrictions in the license). Alternatively, if A determines that the operator/registrant is not a licensee, this is a necessary first step in seeking contractual enforcement of terms of service by the registrar/registry, and/or potentially ICANN contractual enforcement of registrar/registry obligations to investigate and take appropriate action. Steve [image001] Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com<http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU. From: Chuck [mailto:consult@cgomes.com] Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 10:18 AM To: Metalitz, Steven; 'Kris Seeburn' Cc: lisa@corecom.com; 'Bastiaan Goslings'; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Thanks for the very helpful feedback Steve. My intent was not to eliminate any use cases but rather to differentiate between Regulatory action and Contractual Enforcement. I don’t think that third parties enforce the agreements, but they can and are a source that assists ICANN Contractual Compliance so maybe we need to word it in a way that includes that. As I said in a different email a few days ago, the DT5 team (Regulatory or Contractual Enforcement) suggested that the Regulatory & Legal Actions purposes could be combined into one. How do DT5 team members feel about that? Note that I put that on the agenda for our call tomorrow. I am happy to see that my edits generated discussion. In the end the team needs to decide what to do, not me. Steve – if you want to revise the language to deal with any of these issues, I think that would be very helpful before our call tomorrow. And please do not feel obliged to use my edits. Chuck From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com] Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 2:33 PM To: 'Chuck' <consult@cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>>; 'Kris Seeburn' <seeburn.k@gmail.com<mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com>> Cc: lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>; 'Bastiaan Goslings' <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net<mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>>; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org<mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Chuck’s suggested change re contractual enforcement would eliminate consideration of a number of use cases generated either by the EWG, see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf%20%2...> , pages 9, 24, 28), or by this WG in an earlier phase of our work, (see https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries%20for%20compliance%20purposes.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1470109106000&api=v2<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/60493753/14-WHOIS%20queries%20for%20compliance%20purposes.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1470109106000&api=v2>). Our earlier draft identified five examples of entities using RDS for contractual enforcement purposes: “These entities include governmental tax authorities, UDRP providers, the ICANN organization, intellectual property owners, and merchant account monitoring solution providers, among others.” Chuck’s proposed change would move the first of these to the regulatory enforcement category (I support that), but would eliminate the second, fourth and fifth examples. It would recognize the contractual enforcement use only when ICANN was a party to the contract (the third example). Chuck, if your point is that these uses fit better under “legal actions” than under “contractual enforcement,” then I would be OK with that so long as they are explicitly addressed under “legal actions.” I think they fit better under “contract enforcement” because they in fact involve enforcement of contracts; but if the investigation supported by RDS data indicates a breach of contract, then the result may be a “legal action,” i.e., a lawsuit. I would be quite concerned however if these important uses were not captured either in “contract enforcement” nor in “legal actions.” Maybe Chuck or Lisa could advise us whether that is or is not the case. Steve Metalitz [image001] Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com<http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU. From: Chuck [mailto:consult@cgomes.com] Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2017 10:39 AM To: 'Kris Seeburn' Cc: Metalitz, Steven; lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>; 'Bastiaan Goslings'; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org<mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Importance: High I arrived home last night and am trying to catch up. Can someone please send me the latest Word versions and the links to the Google Docs for both deliverables? Also, regarding the definitions, I have been thinking about them and suspect that some WG members will have problem with the word ‘collected’ so I suggest that we consider using the word ‘used’ instead. And for Contractual Enforcement I question whether we should refer to Private Party Contracts because ICANN Compliance does not have any enforcement ability with Private Party Contracts so I edited that. They would then read as follows: Contractual Enforcement Information used to enable ICANN Compliance to monitor and enforce contracted parties’ agreements with ICANN, as well as resolving issues of compliance arising from issues raised by private parties. Regulatory Information used to enable contact between the registrant and/or their designated point of contact and regulatory entities to ensure compliance with applicable laws. Please feel free to comment on these suggested edits before our call on Monday. Finally, here is a listing from the Wednesday meeting that summarizes our tasks: o Summarize each purpose in one sentence: “Information collected to enable contact between the registrant and <who> <to accomplish what>” o Think in terms of explaining to the data subject why data is being collected for this purpose – keep it concise and simple. o Are the tasks/users identified by your team so diverse and distinct that they may be more than one purpose? If so, split them up and describe each purpose separately. o Which purposes covered by other teams are closely related to or overlap the purpose(s) covered by your team? o Is there any data collected specifically for the stated purpose? Or does that purpose use only data collected for other purposes? If anyone has thoughts about any of these items, please share them with the team; we will discuss them on our call. Chuck From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 10:37 PM To: Chuck <consult@cgomes.com<mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> Cc: Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com>>; lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>; Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net<mailto:bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net>>; GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org<mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Chuck looked up at your edits and made a few balancing facts. I am now forwarding the updated latest document that we have worked on. We will also be finding a way to work with the team who have worked on “Legal” and i think we may need at some point work with the “investigation” team which in reality also matches with both the enforcement and regulatory. Just some suggestions. They will be good additions to our work. In fact i feel there are areas that overlap which may be the connection points to the whole of each group. But that would be a later stage approach. I think we need to update and push it to the google docs now so that everyone sees the same versioning as we move. Suggestions: Use cases as Appendix to the documents. Anything else to grow the document and understanding can be laid out as an appendix to each document. Another area that we may add at a later stage is “new gtld auction proceeds” they may be within contractual enforcement and some other groups.

On Nov 1, 2017, at 16:55, Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com> wrote:

OK, I am now completely confused, since neither the link Lisa provides nor the one Chuck provides reflects the bifurcation of legal and regulatory enforcement into separate documents, which Chuck just now stated in the RDS meeting has been done. I believe the most recent iteration of that approach was the one I circulated around 4 pm EDT (midnight AD time) which I attach here. However it is quite possible I have missed something overnight……

Steve

<image001.gif> Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com <mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com <http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Lisa Phifer Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 6:55 AM To: 'Bastiaan Goslings'; consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

All, the easiest way to step through the email exchanged by this team is your DT mailing list archive: Http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/ <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/>

It appears from that email archive that the latest version of your working document is (maintained in Word format: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/attachments/20171031/d68aa0b0/D... <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-5/attachments/20171031/d68aa0b0/D...>

Regards Lisa

-----Original Message----- From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Bastiaan Goslings Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 2:36 PM To: consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Yep, good to hear that you’re ok, Kris!

I hope you guys don’t mind me asking, but can someone please forward the latest version of the DT5 purpose doc that we are meant to provide an update on this afternoon? Since a google-doc was not used (?), and I cannot find the latest draft in the email-swamp I’m facing…

thanks ;-) Bastiaan

...

On 1 Nov 2017, at 14:27, consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> wrote:

Glad to hear that Kris.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com>] Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:25 AM To: consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Am back i was given a treatment for an infection and now am on antibiotics and pain killers. I will be in the 4 PM meeting. Just attending another meeting right now…but have already set apology for 4 PM.

See you in a few.

...

On Nov 1, 2017, at 14:20, <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> wrote:

We could have looked at you if that is all you need Kris! 😊 Hope all is well.

Chuck

From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com>] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update

Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me

Kris

On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com>> wrote:

...

Kris,

Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday?

Chuck

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com> • www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>

<image001.gif>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>

_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5><Seeburn draft 103117 contractual (9439160).docx><SJM atop CG edits re regulatory (9440256).docx>_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5>

Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>

Steve, As you probably saw, Kris should be able to make it. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of consult@cgomes.com Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 3:22 AM To: 'Kris Seeburn' <seeburn.k@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Steve, If Kris is unable to give a 2-3 minute update, could you do it if the remote connection is clear? Chuck From: Kris Seeburn [mailto:seeburn.k@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:11 PM To: consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> Cc: GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:GNSO-RDS-pdp-5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pdp-5] DT5 Update Remind me the time in the afternoon plz. Am headed to clinic now to have a doctor have a look at me Kris On 1 Nov 2017, at 08:47, <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> > <consult@cgomes.com <mailto:consult@cgomes.com> > wrote: Kris, Can you give a 2 or 3 minute update in the WG meeting today of what DT6 has done since Saturday? Chuck _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pdp-5 mailing list Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rds-pdp-5@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-5