May 2014 - ispcp - lists.icann.org

Fwd: Domain Name Collisions
by Mike O'Connor June 22, 2014

June 22, 2014

hi all, Jim Baskin (of the BC, and Verizon) is working on finding partners for a collaboration on raising awareness about the Name Collision issue. this looks like a natural for many of us and i’ve agreed to circulate Jim’s proposal to the ISPCP. please include Jim in any replies to this note. Jim, i decided to add your introduction in, along with the proposal — it’s too good to leave out. :-) could people please give this some serious consideration — i think Izumi’s presentation would make a great contribution to this effort, for example. if hope much collaboration results. thanks, mikey > > On our last conference call I spoke about domain name collision analysis work Verizon has been undertaking with Interisle Consulting. We have been analyzing our DNS query logs to get a clearer picture of the extent and impact of “leaking” queries to not-yet delegated or operational gTLDs. > > We have been considering a parallel effort to develop documentation, and possibly a webinar, to help prepare ourselves and our customers for telecommunications and systems problems that could arise once queries to some of the new gTLDs begin to resolve and receive responses other than NXDOMAIN (domain does not exist). > > While preparing the plan to develop those materials, we realized that most of what we were describing would be of value to other carriers, ISPs, general business enterprises, and more. As a result, we have decided to reach out to like-minded companies to jointly fund the development of these materials. > > The following is a high-level description of the work effort. With the support of a handful of companies, these materials could be rapidly produced and distributed at minimal cost to each of the participating organizations. If your organization might be interested to supporting and benefiting from this work, please contact me to discuss it in more detail. We are open to refinement or reasonable expansion of the deliverables, keeping in mind that we want to keep the development timeline as short as possible since the first new gTLDs will go live within the next month. > > Thanks for your consideration, and please feel free to share this message with other organizations outside of the BC who might be interested in participating. > > Jim Baskin > Verizon Communications > > > Proposal for the Preparation of Awareness, Educational/Training, > and Technical Support Materials Related to DNS Name Collisions > > 1. Develop descriptions of specific query/response scenarios that could arise as a result of conflicts of private and public naming schemes in the DNS. Document how these situations might appear to a user or technical support person, and what can be done to deal with such situations before or after they arise. Integrate the material into a comprehensive awareness and training program. > > 2. Create documentation for awareness, training, and support for management, employees/users and support staff. Materials oriented for various audiences would include: > · For management: awareness materials about the potential operational, technical, and security risks of DNS name collisions. > · For employees/users: information about the changes in network and system behavior that could arise as a result of new TLDs being delegated, how to recognize when problems encountered could be a result of new TLD name conflicts, how they can resolve problems on their own, and when they will require technical support. > · For customer-facing personnel (sales, marketing): how to communicate with customers to make them aware of the change in TLD resolution behavior and the potential impact, before and after delegation of TLDs. > · For technical support personnel: step-by-step procedures for identification and avoidance or remediation of collision occurrences. > > 3. Create communication information packages for distribution by email, web, etc. as appropriate, for target audiences, possibly including one or more webinars. > > 5. If webinars are developed, conduct a single session of the webinar(s), which would be video-recorded for distribution. > >

2 1

The private ISPCP list is temporarily down and being worked on
by Christian Dawson May 30, 2014

May 30, 2014

Dear colleagues, The ISPCP private email list is down - I am working with Mikey O'Connor to bring it back up. This is an unfortunate byproduct of the move from Mikey's infrastructure to our new infrastructure. We may be down for a couple more days but I will work on expediting things. If anybody needs to contact the group privately between now and then, let me know and I may be able to work out a temporary solution. All the best, -Christian

1 0

Nomination for GNSO council
by WUKnoben May 29, 2014

May 29, 2014

Dear colleagues, as the nomination period has started on May 26, I’d like to nominate Christian Dawson as candidate. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich

2 1

Re: REMINDER from GNSO Policy & Implementation WG : Request for input (ISPCP)
by WUKnoben May 15, 2014

May 15, 2014

Dear Olivier, on behalf of the ISPCP constituency I send you some feedback re the request for input of the Policy & Implementation WG. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Olivier Kouami [mailto:olivierkouami@gmail.com] Sent: 06 May 2014 19:56 To: tony holmes (tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com) Anthony Harris Cc: gnso-policyimpl-chairs(a)icann.org Subject: Re: REMINDER from GNSO Policy & Implementation WG : Request for input (ISPCP) FY reminder, please Cheers ! -Olevie- 2014-02-18 4:14 GMT-03:00 Olivier Kouami <olivierkouami(a)gmail.com>: Dear Tony and Anthony, I wanted to take the opportunity to follow up with you concerning the request for input that your group received a while back from the Policy & Implementation Working Group (see below). The WG would be interested to know whether your group plans to submit a response, if so, when you estimate it will be sent. The P & I WG would also like to let you know that responses to just a few of the questions that are of special interest to your group would be welcome as are general statements of any concerns regarding the issues related to policy and implementation that are of particular interest to your group. Please kindly note that additional opportunities for feedback are expected to occur later on in the process, for example with the publication of the Initial Report for public comment. Best regards For the P&I WG, Olevie KOUAMI co-Vice Chair ======================================= Message to the ISPCP) ================================== From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Date: Friday 6 December 2013 11:34 To: "tony holmes (tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com)" <tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com>, Anthony Harris <harris(a)cabase.org.ar> Cc: "gnso-policyimpl-chairs(a)icann.org" <gnso-policyimpl-chairs(a)icann.org>, "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-chairs] Policy & Implementation - Request for Input Dear SG/Constituency Chair: We are the Chairs of the newly constituted Policy & Implementation Working Group. This Working Group (WG) has been tasked with providing the GNSO Council with a set of recommendations on the following issues: · A set of principles that would underpin any GNSO policy implementation related discussions, taking into account existing GNSO procedures; · A process for developing gTLD policy, perhaps in the form of “Policy Guidance,” including criteria for when it would be appropriate to use such a process (for a process developing something other than “Consensus Policy”) instead of the GNSO Policy Development Process; · A framework for implementation related discussions associated with GNSO Policy recommendations; · Criteria to be used to determine when an action should be addressed by a policy process and when it should be considered implementation; and · Further guidance on how GNSO Implementation Review Teams, as defined in the PDP Manual, are expected to function and operate. As part of the effort, the WG wants to reach out at the beginning of our efforts to the various GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies as we have already done to other Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees to gain input to assist us in our efforts. In this regard, we would ask for your organization to consider the following questions which are set out in the WG’s Charter and provide us with your input on any of these issues by 31 January 2014. 1. What guidance do the ICANN core values (Bylaws Article 1, Sec. 2) directly provide with regard to policy development work and policy implementation efforts? (e.g., multi-stakeholder participation). 2. What guidance do other ICANN core values provide that relate indirectly to policy development and policy implementation? (e.g., effective and timely process). 3. “Questions for Discussion” contained in the Policy versus Implementation Draft Framework prepared by ICANN staff. (See, http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/policy-implementation-31jan13-e…) 4. What lessons can be learned from past experience? a. What are the consequences of action being considered “policy” vs. “implementation”? b. Does it matter if something is “policy” or “implementation”? If so, why? c. Under what circumstances, if any, should the GNSO Council make recommendations or state positions to the Board on matters of policy and implementation as a representative of the GNSO as a whole? d. How do we avoid the current morass of outcome-derived labeling (i.e., I will call this “policy” because I want certain consequences or “handling instructions” to be attached to it?) e. Can we answer these questions so the definitions of “policy” and “implementation” matter less, if at all? 5. What options are available for policy (“Consensus Policy” or other) and implementation efforts and what are the criteria for determining which should be used? a. Are “policy” and “implementation” on a spectrum rather than binary? b. What are the “flavors” of policy and what consequences should attach to each “flavor? c. What happens if you change those consequences? 6. Who determines the choice of whether something is “policy” or “implementation”? a. How is policy set/recommended/adopted and do different paths lead to different “flavors”? b. How is the “policy” versus “implementation” issue reviewed and approved? c. What happens if reviewing bodies come to a deadlock? 7. What is the process by which this identification, analysis, review and approval work is done? a. How are “policy and implementation” issues first identified (before, during and after implementation)? b. What is the role of the GNSO in implementation? c. In order to maintain the multi-stakeholder process, once policy moves to implementation, how should the community be involved in a way that is meaningful and effective? d. Should policy staff be involved through the implementation process to facilitate continuity of the multi-stakeholder process that already occurred? Alternatively, if you would prefer to set up an exchange of views by teleconference, the Working Group would welcome such an approach as well. Finally, we would like to remind you that the WG is open to the full community and we welcome any additional members from your organization that my wish to participate in this work. To review the current membership, please see https://community.icann.org/x/81V-Ag. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Please do not hesitate to reach out to either of us if you have any questions or if you require any additional information. Kind regards. Chuck Gomes (cgomes(a)verisign.com) J. Scott Evans (jscottevans(a)outlook.com) -- Olévié (Olivier) A. A. KOUAMI Membre de ISoc (www.isog.org) & du FOSSFA (www.fossfa.net) DG Ets GIDA-OKTETS & CEO de INTIC4DEV (http://www.intic4dev.org) PC Vice Chair for Francophone Africa ICANN-NCSG/NPOC (http://www.npoc.org/) SG de ESTETIC (http://www.estetic.tg) Po Box : 851 - Tél.: (228) 90 98 86 50 / (228) 928 512 41 / (228) 224 999 25 Skype : olevie1 Facebook : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé – Togo -- Olévié (Olivier) A. A. KOUAMI Membre de ISoc (www.isog.org) & du FOSSFA (www.fossfa.net) DG Ets GIDA-OKTETS & CEO de INTIC4DEV (http://www.intic4dev.org) PC Vice Chair for Francophone Africa ICANN-NCSG/NPOC (http://www.npoc.org/) SG de ESTETIC (http://www.estetic.tg) Po Box : 851 - Tél.: (228) 90 98 86 50 / (228) 928 512 41 / (228) 224 999 25 Skype : olevie1 Facebook : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé – Togo

1 0

RV: Proposed Agenda - GNSO Review Committee Meeting
by Novoa, Osvaldo May 6, 2014

May 6, 2014

All, I think this document will clarify what was discussed in the GNSO Review Working Party today, and what will be discuss on this in the Council. Best regards, [cid:629284516@06052014-2301]Osvaldo Novoa Subgerente General Antel Guatemala 1075, Nivel 22 Montevideo, 11800 Uruguay Tel. +598 2928 6400 Fax. +598 2928 6401 ________________________________ De: owner-gnso-review-dt(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org] En nombre de Jen Wolfe Enviado el: Martes, 06 de Mayo de 2014 13:28 Para: Larisa B. Gurnick; Marika Konings; gnso-review-dt(a)icann.org CC: Jonathan Robinson (jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com) Asunto: [gnso-review-dt] RE: Proposed Agenda - GNSO Review Committee Meeting Thanks Larisa and Avri for comments. I incorporated your comments and attach a revised version for reference. Of course, please let me know if you propose other revisions or additions. I look forward to the webinar tomorrow and discussion with the Council on Thursday. Thanks - have a great afternoon! jennifer c. WOLFE, esq., apr, SSBB Founder & President, wolfe domain, a digital brand strategy advisory firm Co-Managing Partner, Wolfe Sadler Breen Morasch & Colby, intellectual property law, INTL Trademark Law Firm of the Year 2013 513.746.2801 IAM 300 - TOp 300 global ip strategists 2011, 2012 & 2013 Follow Me: [cid:image001.png@01CF6926.86676330] <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jenwolfe> [cid:image002.png@01CF6926.86676330] <http://pinterest.com/wolfedomain/> [cid:image003.png@01CF6926.86676330] <https://twitter.com/jenwolfe> Follow My Blog<http://www.jenwolfe.com/blog> Domain Names Rewired<http://www.amazon.com/Domain-Names-Rewired-Strategies-Protection/dp/1118312…> From: Larisa B. Gurnick [mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 12:06 PM To: Jen Wolfe; Marika Konings; gnso-review-dt(a)icann.org Cc: Jonathan Robinson (jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com) Subject: RE: Proposed Agenda - GNSO Review Committee Meeting Jen, Thank you for the productive meeting and the outline. I propose several edits in the spirit of clarity and consistency of terminology. The SIC is planning a 360 review to be facilitated by an independent auditor. This will seek input from the community on a variety of topics. · I would use "360 Assessment" rather than "360 Review" and "examiner" rather than "auditor". · The independent examiner will not be facilitating the 360 Assessment - they will use the data collected via the 360 as one of the key data points for the review. · As one of the components of the overall GNSO Review, the 360 Assessment is envisioned as an online tool that will collect feedback from the GNSO community, other ICANN structures and community members, the Board and staff. The 360 Assessment questions will be developed based on criteria that will be used for the overall GNSO Review. The proposed scope for the GNSO Review Working Party includes it providing feedback on review criteria and the 360 Assessment. Thank you, Larisa Larisa B. Gurnick Director, Strategic Initiatives Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) larisa.gurnick(a)icann.org<mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org> 310 383-8995 From: owner-gnso-review-dt(a)icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jen Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 6:44 AM To: Marika Konings; gnso-review-dt(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org> Cc: Jonathan Robinson (jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com<mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com>) Subject: [gnso-review-dt] RE: Proposed Agenda - GNSO Review Committee Meeting Hi everyone, Thank you so much for your time on the call today. In follow up to our discussion, I have briefly outlined the update we discussed providing to Council on Thursday, questions to pose to Council and our agreed upon time frame and next steps (attached). In the interest of time, if you could please let me know any changes or revisions to this summary prior to the meeting on Thursday, I would really appreciate it. Marika, if you don't mind sending out the request for a Doodle Poll, we can get our weekly meetings scheduled. I also have a bit of an overlap with another board meeting on Thursday so I may not be able to be on the entire call, but will plan to jump on to lead this discussion on the Review. I will have open Adobe Connect, but Marika, if you could email me when we are about 10 minutes out from the Review discussion, I would be most grateful. The internet does allow us to be in two places at once - doesn't it? :) Thanks again everyone for your time and I look forward to working with you! With kindest regards, Jen jennifer c. WOLFE, esq., apr, SSBB Founder & President, wolfe domain, a digital brand strategy advisory firm Co-Managing Partner, Wolfe Sadler Breen Morasch & Colby, intellectual property law, INTL Trademark Law Firm of the Year 2013 513.746.2801 IAM 300 - TOp 300 global ip strategists 2011, 2012 & 2013 Follow Me: [cid:image001.png@01CF6926.86676330] <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jenwolfe> [cid:image002.png@01CF6926.86676330] <http://pinterest.com/wolfedomain/> [cid:image003.png@01CF6926.86676330] <https://twitter.com/jenwolfe> Follow My Blog<http://www.jenwolfe.com/blog> Domain Names Rewired<http://www.amazon.com/Domain-Names-Rewired-Strategies-Protection/dp/1118312…> From: owner-gnso-review-dt(a)icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Monday, May 05, 2014 10:17 AM To: gnso-review-dt(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-review-dt] Proposed Agenda - GNSO Review Committee Meeting Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the GNSO Review Committee meeting tomorrow as well as some related documents attached for your review. Best regards, Marika Proposed Agenda - GNSO Review Committee Meeting - 6 May 2014 · Scope of Work for the committee · Developing a self-review to run in tandem with the SIC Review · Size & composition of the committee o Transparency o Brand Registry Group interest in the Review o Other group interests in the review · Frequency of Meetings · Webinar Preparation · Next Steps ________________________________ El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.

1 0

GNSO Review Committee
by WUKnoben May 5, 2014

May 5, 2014

All, on the GNSO calendar I see a meeting of the GNSO Review Committee scheduled tomorrow 12:30 UTC. Do we have a rep. on this committee? In addition my calendar shows an ISPCP call tomorrow at 13:00 UTC, ok? Best regards Wolf-Ulrich

3 2

RV: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change
by Novoa, Osvaldo May 5, 2014

May 5, 2014

Dear all, Could you please let me know your position regarding Steve Crocker's proposal. I would favor option 1. Best regards, Osvaldo [cid:735235515@05052014-1AF4]Osvaldo Novoa Subgerente General Antel Guatemala 1075, Nivel 22 Montevideo, 11800 Uruguay Tel. +598 2928 6400 Fax. +598 2928 6401 ________________________________ De: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] En nombre de Jonathan Robinson Enviado el: Lunes, 05 de Mayo de 2014 07:55 Para: council(a)gnso.icann.org Asunto: [council] FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change All, See below and please provide any feedback you may have ASAP. I know some feel very strongly about the public forum but, given the High Level (Government) meeting taking place on Monday in London, a once-off schedule change may be a good idea? What is being asked for is guidance or feedback on 1 or 2 as a preferred option. Thanks, Jonathan From: soac-infoalert-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Crocker Sent: 02 May 2014 20:02 To: soac-infoalert(a)icann.org Cc: Sally Costerton; Tanzanica S. King; Jim Trengrove; Icann-board ICANN; Nick Tomasso; Theresa Swinehart; Duncan Burns Subject: Re: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 50 possible Thursday change Folks, Sally Costerton and I thank you all for your helpful responses to my earlier note on the idea of changing the Thursday agenda to accommodate more time for the public dialogue we need to deliver at our forthcoming London meeting. We are acutely conscious that the combination several major one-off events - the High Level Government Meeting (HLGM) and the two public consultations are putting significant pressure on the agenda for ICANN50. We are juggling trying to maximise flexibility for SOACs to do their work, access to the HLGM and the need to provide slots for Hot Topics for cross community dialogue with minimal agenda conflict. Having considered your feedback and consulted with staff, we suggest two options below. Please pick one and let us know over the next day or two. 1. We make the changes to Thursday as suggested and support this by running an additional IANA stewardship transition session on Monday after the opening session and provide support to the SOAC groups to find alternative slots on the agenda in addition to the early Thursday slot as needed. We pilot remote hubs using two-way video and hopefully a YouTube channel. The use of remote hubs actually doubled participation at NETmundial so could be a real opportunity to diversify input. 2. We keep Thursday as it usually runs with a four hour public forum and run two consultation sessions - one on the IANA stewardship transition and one on the ICANN accountability dialogue on a 'normal' schedule - this would be Monday or Wednesday to get time that is minimally conflicted. This would be much like Singapore. We would not set up the video remote hubs in this case or possibly the YouTube channel. This would maintain the full Public Forum but reduce the time and attention for the two consultation sessions. Also the Monday sessions will have to run parallel to the HLGM and we know that UKG have requested a session on IANA oversight transition led by Larry Strickling. Finally we are very aware that the community wants to improve the issue of agenda conflict at ICANN meetings. This topic was addressed in detail by the Meeting Strategy Working Group which recently had its report out for public comment. There was a previous opportunity to see this but in case you haven't, not here is a copy of the recommendations http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/recommendations-25f… If you can let us know which option you prefer over the next 48 hours we would appreciate it. If we go for option 1 we need to let the community know early next week so that they can confirm travel and we can start the call to set up the hubs. Thanks, Steve Crocker and Sally Costerton ________________________________ El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.

3 2

REMINDER: Meeting Invitation/ ISPCP Monthly CALL
by Nathalie Peregrine May 5, 2014

May 5, 2014

Dear All, The next ISPCP call is scheduled on Tuesday 6th May 2014 at 1300 UTC. To check your local time: http://tinyurl.com/mlb2qlr Adobe Connect room: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/_a819976787/ispcp/?launcher=false Please find the dial-in details below: Participant Passcode: Participant: 3429 # Dial-in numbers: <http://www.adigo.com/icann/> http://www.adigo.com/icann/ Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie Peregrine

2 1

FW: [ioepanel] ISPCP Comments on 'ICANN's role in the Internet Governance Ecosystem'
by Tony Holmes May 1, 2014

May 1, 2014

Please see the response from Vint Cerf to the ISPCP comments. Tony From: Vint Cerf [mailto:vint@google.com] Sent: 01 May 2014 12:17 To: Tony Holmes Cc: ioepanel(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [ioepanel] ISPCP Comments on 'ICANN's role in the Internet Governance Ecosystem' Tony, thanks for this input - while we did not intend for the diagram to be anything but illustrative of various possible relationships, your suggested amendments will improve clarity so they will get attention. vint On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com> wrote: Please find attached comments submitted on behalf of the ISPCP Constituency on the Strategy Panel report on 'ICANN's role in the Internet Governance Ecosystem’. Tony Holmes Chairman ISPCP Constituency _______________________________________________ ioepanel mailing list ioepanel(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ioepanel

1 0

Fw: Confirming SCI Membership: ISPC
by WUKnoben May 1, 2014

May 1, 2014

Any volunteer for the job as alternate member to the SCI (Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation)? I’ll stay as primary member, so anyway the work is on my side. I’m prepared to provide more detailed information on the SCI tasks if so wished. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Ron Andruff Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 8:51 PM To: 'WUKnoben' Cc: tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com ; 'Julie Hedlund' Subject: RE: Confirming SCI Membership: ISPC Good afternoon, Wolf-Ulrich. I trust that your Easter break was a pleasant one? I’m coming back to you today with a gentle reminder that the SCI is anxious to have both primary and alternate representatives from each AC/SO to ensure that the SCI work can move along without any under-representation issues. Please let us know who will be the alternate ISP representative at your soonest convenience. Thank you. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff ONR Consulting, Inc. www.ICANNSherpa.com From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff@rnapartners.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 18:44 To: 'WUKnoben' Cc: 'tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com'; 'Julie Hedlund' Subject: RE: Confirming SCI Membership: ISPC Thank you for your prompt response, Wolf-Ulrich. Enjoy your vacation! RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com From: WUKnoben [mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 16:24 To: Ron Andruff Cc: tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com; 'Julie Hedlund' Subject: Re: Confirming SCI Membership: ISPC Thanks Ron, yes, there was less attendance also from my side due to personal circumstances. It will improve again after Easter holidays, and I’d like to confirm continuing as the primary for the ISPCP. Our constituency should nominate an alternate as well. We’ll come back to you with this after our next call. I’ll go on holiday tomorrow and will be back on 28 April. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Knoben From: Ron Andruff Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 10:08 PM To: 'WUKnoben' Cc: tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com ; 'Julie Hedlund' Subject: FW: Confirming SCI Membership: ISPC Dear Wolf-Ulrich, We appreciate your participation as a member of the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI). However, attendance for the meetings of the SCI has been lower than it should be, ultimately hampering the Standing Committee’s output. In order to ensure full representation at the meetings from each Stakeholder Group and Constituency (see the list at https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/4.+Members) I would like to confirm that you will continue to be the appropriate representative for your group. Please also note that as of this time there is no Alternate for your Constituency. Could you please respond to this message by **COB Monday, 21 April** to confirm your membership and indicate who else from your group will join you? In addition, if you have concerns about the timing of the meetings that may hinder your participation, please also let us know. Thank you very much for helping to ensure that we have representation at the SCI meetings from all of our Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies. Best regards, RA Ron Andruff, SCI Chair

4 3