Thankyou. I have taken note of this publication.

1. I do not agree with the characterisation of Appendix 4 as 'minority' opinions.

No poll of the iAG members was ever taken; I am quite sure that the criticisms of the policy evoked in Appendix 4 are very widely held.

2. I have strong reservations about the suggestion to refer the matter to another GNSO PDP. The issues arise in the first place from a flawed GNSO PDP a decade ago.

I have little confidence, that another such exercise would lead to a more balanced and informed outcome.

3. Even within the restrictive parameters of the IAG, it was agreed that the existing policy had never been invoked; that should - at the very least - have led the ICANN staff to consider why that is the case. It is quite clear that the various 'trigger' mechanisms discussed in the report will not facilitate ICANN in conforming to applicable privacy and data protection laws in many jurisdictions. 

Regards

Christopher Wilkinson