Dear members of the IRT, Happy Monday! We will soon start to review public from the second<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/second-proceeding-for-pro...> and from the third<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/third-proceeding-for-prop...> public comment period, an integral part of ICANN’s bottom-up multistakeholder model. Before we start the discussions, I wanted to take the opportunity to remind everyone that the purpose of these public comments was to ensure that the draft AGB language aligns with the wording and intent of the SubPro recommendations not to re-open issues that the IRT has already discussed. An exception to this would be cases such as the Terms and Conditions, where we agreed to continue the substantive discussion during/after the public comment period. With that in mind, methodology for reviewing the comments will mirror what we did for the review of the first public comments: We will share and review our public comment analysis and focus on comments that note that draft AGB text does not align with the wording or intent of the SubPro recommendations. At this stage we will not reopen language that was discussed already with the IRT – unless it turns out that this language does not align with the wording or intent of the SubPro policy language. Similarly, we will not be able to discuss proposals for issues that are not based on SubPro recommendations. Please, do not hesitate to reach out with any question. Very best. Lars