<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">In my view, a second
public comment period is always a good idea, but particularly
when something is moving as slowly as this one. Time passes,
issues change.<br>
</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Stephanie Perrin</font></font><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2019-05-09 10:04, Johan Helsingius
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:5fefba3e-0b77-3366-935a-bbf45f4b5046@julf.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">One of the questions coming out of the CCWG Auction Proceeds
call this week is whether a second public comment period is
desirable, and if so, what the minimum duration for the comment
period should be. This is in light of the actions being taken
in response to the first comment period:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102138829/new%20gTLD%20AP%20CCWG%20Agreements%20-%20updated%2022%20April%202019.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1555965919000&api=v2">https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102138829/new%20gTLD%20AP%20CCWG%20Agreements%20-%20updated%2022%20April%202019.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1555965919000&api=v2</a>
Julf
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>