From stephanie.perrin  Sat Jul 29 06:19:02 2017
From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 23:19:02 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] fortunately, I dont go on twitter that often....
Message-ID: <8974493f-63e0-e5b0-bef3-d7a767d148b2@mail.utoronto.ca>

But I did see this:

*ICANN*?Verified account@*ICANN* <https://twitter.com/ICANN> 9h9 hours 
ago <https://twitter.com/ICANN/status/890994704514334720>

#*ICANN* <https://twitter.com/hashtag/ICANN?src=hash>?s new Chief Data 
Protection Officer will ensure we are up to date on the latest data 
privacy regulations > http://go.icann.org/2vQFmHU <https://t.co/UlasyMbqLR>


Oh yeah?  I kind of doubt this....so the question is, do we go for this 
poor guy and ask him what he is doing on a number of fronts or not?
I am kind of voting for bring-it-on at this point, but maybe we should 
be more supportive....
Steph Perrin
<https://t.co/UlasyMbqLR>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20170728/5a6575bc/attachment.html>


From icann  Sat Jul 29 11:12:13 2017
From: icann (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 04:12:13 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] fortunately, I dont go on twitter that often....
In-Reply-To: <8974493f-63e0-e5b0-bef3-d7a767d148b2@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <8974493f-63e0-e5b0-bef3-d7a767d148b2@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <R0gAwqf-wdZAsAmBZnFe7Bxz7XlNpSPnSBV5Jho338yRyzwyyOOsetYrJkp9s66OrQD5jxw5kC9boLrAFCF5QjUIHziaGYDhiCU8kIU_sSw=@ferdeline.com>

I think we need to ask what qualifies him to be the organisation's Chief Data Protection Officer. The individual hired has no experience (as best I can tell from his bio) in privacy or data protection, so I am very curious as to how he plans to counsel ICANN on the development of privacy practices, policies, and internal data security requirements. That he has worked for ICANN for 17 years suggests to me he will be looking to reinforce the status quo, not push for any meaningful change, though I hope very much I am mistaken.

- Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [PC-NCSG] fortunately, I dont go on twitter that often....
> Local Time: July 29, 2017 4:19 AM
> UTC Time: July 29, 2017 3:19 AM
> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
> To: NCSG-Policy <pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org>
>
> But I did see this:
>
> [ICANN?Verified account @ICANN](https://twitter.com/ICANN)  [9h9 hours ago](https://twitter.com/ICANN/status/890994704514334720)
>
> [#ICANN](https://twitter.com/hashtag/ICANN?src=hash)?s new Chief Data Protection Officer will ensure we are up to date on the latest data privacy regulations > [http://go.icann.org/2vQFmHU](https://t.co/UlasyMbqLR)
>
> Oh yeah? I kind of doubt this....so the question is, do we go for this poor guy and ask him what he is doing on a number of fronts or not?
> I am kind of voting for bring-it-on at this point, but maybe we should be more supportive....
> Steph Perrin [http://go.icann.org/2vQFmHU](https://t.co/UlasyMbqLR)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20170729/6c3cdead/attachment-0001.html>


From avri  Sat Jul 29 19:55:37 2017
From: avri (avri doria)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 12:55:37 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] fortunately, I dont go on twitter that often....
In-Reply-To: <8974493f-63e0-e5b0-bef3-d7a767d148b2@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <8974493f-63e0-e5b0-bef3-d7a767d148b2@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <1de5f810-22d6-1903-c9af-ca2089b48b9d@apc.org>

Hi,

I expect that they will find the letter of the law and make sure ICANN
is adhereing to it.

Might need expert assistance with that though. Lucky we have some in NCSG.

avri



On 28-Jul-17 23:19, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>
> But I did see this:
>
> *ICANN*?Verified account @*ICANN* <https://twitter.com/ICANN> 9h9
> hours ago <https://twitter.com/ICANN/status/890994704514334720>
>
> #*ICANN* <https://twitter.com/hashtag/ICANN?src=hash>?s new Chief Data
> Protection Officer will ensure we are up to date on the latest data
> privacy regulations > http://go.icann.org/2vQFmHU
> <https://t.co/UlasyMbqLR>
>
>
> Oh yeah?  I kind of doubt this....so the question is, do we go for
> this poor guy and ask him what he is doing on a number of fronts or not?
> I am kind of voting for bring-it-on at this point, but maybe we should
> be more supportive....
> Steph Perrin
> <https://t.co/UlasyMbqLR>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus




From icann at ferdeline.com  Mon Jul  3 19:00:24 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2017 12:00:24 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
	for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <frLx058kwjQ2cYsSRdgKJe0DfDbZ6HySDhxeuY4AolxMB8buUFSC6pGmPOgQoMxPnVsAP0OC9FcekMRJYvwQ1AAgrpbhSw8VjrpJuCUlFe0=@ferdeline.com>
 <3c906cbf-bc1a-f29e-119d-da5eada7ed6a@edri.org>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>

A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re: handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing

Best wishes, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
> From: icann at ferdeline.com
> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment. The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing); your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>
>> Maryant, hi-
>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able to review them. Thanks again!
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ayden F?rdeline
>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can't promise anything at this stage because it wasn't foreseen in our work schedule, but I'll try my best.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Maryant
>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>
>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>>> Best,
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its implementation.
>>>>> I'm aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>> What's the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>> Tel:
>>>>> [+32 2 274 25 70](tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070)
>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>
>>>>> Donate to EDRi!
>>>>> https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news!
>>>>> http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>> I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a week's time. Thank you!
>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>> Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>> Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>> UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>> From: icann at FERDELINE.COM
>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>> I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the effectiveness of the updated [ICANN Procedure](https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en) for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>> The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in 30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>> https://edri.org
>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70
>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>
>>> Donate to EDRi!
>>> https://edri.org/donate/
>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news!
>>> http://edri.org/newsletters/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170703/14a58876/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Tue Jul  4 14:32:01 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 20:32:01 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
 Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <frLx058kwjQ2cYsSRdgKJe0DfDbZ6HySDhxeuY4AolxMB8buUFSC6pGmPOgQoMxPnVsAP0OC9FcekMRJYvwQ1AAgrpbhSw8VjrpJuCUlFe0=@ferdeline.com>
 <3c906cbf-bc1a-f29e-119d-da5eada7ed6a@edri.org>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThkrxpCaQc6LWUjDGo1vviM7gJS-U-roGiLWSxQaKqeUig@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ayden,

Thanks for the work done and getting comments. Please resolve the comments
in document and clean it up
@PC members please review the document and share your opinion asap.
since the draft was shared weeks ago and the deadline to submit the comment
is the Friday 7th July, so the deadline for approval is the 6th July.

Best,

Rafik

2017-07-04 1:00 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:

> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re: handling
> WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
> From: icann at ferdeline.com
> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>
> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment. The
> submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and it still
> needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>;
> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to the
> recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
> From: icann at ferdeline.com
> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>
> Maryant, hi-
>
> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi may be
> able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS conflicts with
> privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if we receive comments or
> suggested edits up to 72 hours before the comment submission deadline of 7
> July 23:59 UTC, we should be able to review them. Thanks again!
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden F?rdeline
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>
> Hi,
>
> I've set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can't promise anything at
> this stage because it wasn't foreseen in our work schedule, but I'll try my
> best.
>
> Thanks,
> Maryant
>
> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>
> Hi Maryant,
>
> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its impacts
> https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-
> its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez <
> maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>:
>
> Hi Ayden & all,
>>
>> Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in EDRi we have
>> extensively worked on the GDPR and in its implementation.
>> I'm aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>> What's the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>
>> Thanks and best regards,
>> Maryant
>>
>> --
>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>> Senior Policy Advisor
>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>> 20 Rue Belliard
>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)https://edri.org
>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>
>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>
>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>
>> Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the updated
>> ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3
>> and 7, in particular, are new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed
>> comment is warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
>> hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this date, given we
>> have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a week's time. Thank you!
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5
>> O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling
>> WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>> Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>> UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>> From: icann at FERDELINE.COM
>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>
>> Dear colleagues,
>>
>> I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the effectiveness of
>> the updated ICANN Procedure
>> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en>
>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly welcome your
>> comments, suggestions, and edits so that we can strengthen this comment.
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5
>> O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in 30 days, on
>> 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy Committee to review one
>> week earlier, on 5 June, so I kindly ask that you make your comments before
>> this time if you can please. Thanks!
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ayden F?rdeline
>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Maryant Fernandez Perez
> Senior Policy Advisor
> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
> 20 Rue Belliard
> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)https://edri.org
> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
> @edri | @maryantfp
>
> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>
> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170704/97cedcb0/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Tue Jul  4 18:28:47 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 11:28:47 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
	Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThkrxpCaQc6LWUjDGo1vviM7gJS-U-roGiLWSxQaKqeUig@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <frLx058kwjQ2cYsSRdgKJe0DfDbZ6HySDhxeuY4AolxMB8buUFSC6pGmPOgQoMxPnVsAP0OC9FcekMRJYvwQ1AAgrpbhSw8VjrpJuCUlFe0=@ferdeline.com>
 <3c906cbf-bc1a-f29e-119d-da5eada7ed6a@edri.org>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sThkrxpCaQc6LWUjDGo1vviM7gJS-U-roGiLWSxQaKqeUig@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <QJF6HWd1WWD5wM_cQd7IhVp_4-zdmXAoKWRg71Slf9t7bEcPkQtbyjfDhAkmxfexPg9xMUFslcK9oTa-fi7VQHyiKlcsFy4s6FM9-StG7fo=@ferdeline.com>

Thanks for this, Rafik. I have resolved all of the comments. I am very grateful to EDRi for feeding in such useful input and hope we may have the support of the PC to submit this comment by the deadline. I had hoped to receive some more comments regarding the recommendation in paragraph 7, as I think this is the weakest link of the comment as it stands today. Suggestions around how this could be improved are warmly welcomed. Thanks!

Best wishes, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: July 4, 2017 12:32 PM
> UTC Time: July 4, 2017 11:32 AM
> From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com
> To: Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
> ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>
> Hi Ayden,
> Thanks for the work done and getting comments. Please resolve the comments in document and clean it up
>
> @PC members please review the document and share your opinion asap.
> since the draft was shared weeks ago and the deadline to submit the comment is the Friday 7th July, so the deadline for approval is the 6th July.
> Best,
> Rafik
>
> 2017-07-04 1:00 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
>
>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re: handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment. The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing); your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>
>>>> Maryant, hi-
>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able to review them. Thanks again!
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>
>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can't promise anything at this stage because it wasn't foreseen in our work schedule, but I'll try my best.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Maryant
>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its implementation.
>>>>>>> I'm aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>>>> What's the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>>> Tel:
>>>>>>> [+32 2 274 25 70](tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070)
>>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Donate to EDRi!
>>>>>>> https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news!
>>>>>>> http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>> I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a week's time. Thank you!
>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>> Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>> Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>>>> UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>>>> From: icann at FERDELINE.COM
>>>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>>> I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the effectiveness of the updated [ICANN Procedure](https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en) for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>> The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in 30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>> Tel:
>>>>> [+32 2 274 25 70](tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070)
>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>
>>>>> Donate to EDRi!
>>>>> https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news!
>>>>> http://edri.org/newsletters/
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170704/18a83eb4/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Thu Jul  6 10:09:53 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:09:53 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] ICANN GDPR Compliance Consultation Group
In-Reply-To: <20170630044349.GA25917@mail.seltzer.org>
References: <20170630043119.bliuwcnvnwbwa6fi@roller.tarvainen.info>
 <20170630044349.GA25917@mail.seltzer.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThmyS43CQtktp12KOHQ2Fv3iT3rdeKY86oYBKeADX02Vng@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Wendy for the updates,
Please let us know how we can help.

Rafik

2017-06-30 13:43 GMT+09:00 Wendy Seltzer <wendy at seltzer.org>:

> Thanks Tapani,
>
> The group met briefly during the week and will meet by phone next
> Thursday. Its minimal task is to prepare information from which to ask
> European DPAs for review of WHOIS/RDS data elements with respect to the
> personal data protections of GDPR.
> We're currently gathering use cases for all users and data elements. We
> should be aiming to describe those of interest to non-commercial users,
> including academic research and end-user inquiries.
> --Wendy
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 06:31:19AM +0200, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>
>> Dear PC,
>>
>> For the record, new GDPR/RDS task force, officially called
>>
>> ICANN GDPR Compliance Consultation Group
>>
>> was formed very quickly during ICANN59, and after some
>> negotiation they agreed to have three NCSG members there.
>> We did not have time to call a formal PC meeting to
>> select them, but discussions with those present there
>> and over Skype quickly found agreement to select these:
>>
>> Stephanie Perrin
>> Wendy Seltzer
>> Ayden Ferdeline
>>
>> I'm sure they will do an excellent job.
>>
>> --
>> Tapani Tarvainen
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170706/6e89ccc5/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Thu Jul  6 15:00:37 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 21:00:37 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] GNSO Chair election timeline and incoming
	councilors
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=bwoc8p=E+8EaQHYmbOhydYU843ezFRqdwgDDg=fGarA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

reminder about the GNSO chair election timeline. We will have probably soon
some discussion with CSG about the nomination of a candidate from NCPH to
chair position (but also for the vice-chair).

Best,

Rafik

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>
Date: 2017-07-06 20:15 GMT+09:00
Subject: [council] GNSO Chair election timeline and incoming councilors
To: "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>


Dear all,



Please see attached the timeline for the GNSO Chair nomination open date
and election.



Please remember that new councilors are eligible for nomination as Council
chair so the Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies? elections should be
over by the date of nominations. New councilors are to be announced on the 1
st September 2017.



Kind regards,



Nathalie





Nathalie Peregrine
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170706/e4d801b6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2017 GNSO Chair Election Timeline.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 199854 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170706/e4d801b6/attachment.pdf>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Thu Jul  6 15:22:23 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:22:23 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
	Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <frLx058kwjQ2cYsSRdgKJe0DfDbZ6HySDhxeuY4AolxMB8buUFSC6pGmPOgQoMxPnVsAP0OC9FcekMRJYvwQ1AAgrpbhSw8VjrpJuCUlFe0=@ferdeline.com>
 <3c906cbf-bc1a-f29e-119d-da5eada7ed6a@edri.org>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>

The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow, therefore your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please let me know. Thank you!

- Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
> From: icann at ferdeline.com
> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re: handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment. The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing); your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>
>>> Maryant, hi-
>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able to review them. Thanks again!
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I've set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can't promise anything at this stage because it wasn't foreseen in our work schedule, but I'll try my best.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Maryant
>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its implementation.
>>>>>> I'm aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>>> What's the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>> Tel:
>>>>>> [+32 2 274 25 70](tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070)
>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Donate to EDRi!
>>>>>> https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news!
>>>>>> http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>> I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a week's time. Thank you!
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>> Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>> Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>>> UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>>> From: icann at FERDELINE.COM
>>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>> I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the effectiveness of the updated [ICANN Procedure](https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en) for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>> The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in 30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>> https://edri.org
>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70
>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>
>>>> Donate to EDRi!
>>>> https://edri.org/donate/
>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news!
>>>> http://edri.org/newsletters/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170706/29962209/attachment.htm>

From mpsilvavalent at gmail.com  Thu Jul  6 16:12:41 2017
From: mpsilvavalent at gmail.com (Martin Pablo Silva Valent)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 10:12:41 -0300
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] GNSO Chair election timeline and
 incoming councilors
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=bwoc8p=E+8EaQHYmbOhydYU843ezFRqdwgDDg=fGarA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=bwoc8p=E+8EaQHYmbOhydYU843ezFRqdwgDDg=fGarA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C992FAE7-A759-45A8-8B9B-133DAF50AA98@gmail.com>

Hi Rafik,
	Do we have already an idea of possible nominees or nominees we want to promote?

Cheers,
Mart?n

> On Jul 6, 2017, at 9:00 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> reminder about the GNSO chair election timeline. We will have probably soon some discussion with CSG about the nomination of a candidate from NCPH to chair position (but also for the vice-chair).
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org <mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>>
> Date: 2017-07-06 20:15 GMT+09:00
> Subject: [council] GNSO Chair election timeline and incoming councilors
> To: "council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>" <council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>" <gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>>
> 
> 
> Dear all,
> 
>  
> 
> Please see attached the timeline for the GNSO Chair nomination open date and election.
> 
>   
> 
> Please remember that new councilors are eligible for nomination as Council chair so the Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies? elections should be over by the date of nominations. New councilors are to be announced on the 1st September 2017.
> 
>  
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Nathalie
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Nathalie Peregrine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <2017 GNSO Chair Election Timeline.pdf>_______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170706/0f1b8c1c/attachment.htm>

From avri at apc.org  Thu Jul  6 19:26:33 2017
From: avri at apc.org (avri doria)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 12:26:33 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
 Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <frLx058kwjQ2cYsSRdgKJe0DfDbZ6HySDhxeuY4AolxMB8buUFSC6pGmPOgQoMxPnVsAP0OC9FcekMRJYvwQ1AAgrpbhSw8VjrpJuCUlFe0=@ferdeline.com>
 <3c906cbf-bc1a-f29e-119d-da5eada7ed6a@edri.org>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>

(observer)

thanks for making the latest changes.

i think it is fine to go and getting better.

avri


On 06-Jul-17 08:22, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
> The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow, therefore
> your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please let me
> know. Thank you!
>
> - Ayden 
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
>> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>
>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re:
>> handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden 
>>
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>
>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment.
>>> The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and
>>> it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>;
>>> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to
>>> the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Ayden 
>>>
>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>
>>>> Maryant, hi-
>>>>
>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi
>>>> may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS
>>>> conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if
>>>> we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the
>>>> comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able
>>>> to review them. Thanks again!
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>
>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can't promise
>>>>> anything at this stage because it wasn't foreseen in our work
>>>>> schedule, but I'll try my best.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its
>>>>>> impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>> <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
>>>>>> <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in
>>>>>>     EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its
>>>>>>     implementation.
>>>>>>     I'm aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>>>     What's the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>>     Maryant
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     -- 
>>>>>>     Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>     Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>     European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>     20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>     1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>     https://edri.org
>>>>>>     Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>>>>>>     PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>     @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/ 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>>>     Hello all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the
>>>>>>>     updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with
>>>>>>>     Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are
>>>>>>>     new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is
>>>>>>>     warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
>>>>>>>     hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this
>>>>>>>     date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a
>>>>>>>     week's time. Thank you!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>     Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>     for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>     Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>>>     UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>>>     From: icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>
>>>>>>>>     To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>>     <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the
>>>>>>>>     effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>     <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en>
>>>>>>>>     for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly
>>>>>>>>     welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we
>>>>>>>>     can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in
>>>>>>>>     30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy
>>>>>>>>     Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I
>>>>>>>>     kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if
>>>>>>>>     you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>     linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>>>>>>>     <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70
>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>
>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/ 
>>>>>
>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



From kathy at kathykleiman.com  Thu Jul  6 19:43:16 2017
From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 12:43:16 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
 Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <frLx058kwjQ2cYsSRdgKJe0DfDbZ6HySDhxeuY4AolxMB8buUFSC6pGmPOgQoMxPnVsAP0OC9FcekMRJYvwQ1AAgrpbhSw8VjrpJuCUlFe0=@ferdeline.com>
 <3c906cbf-bc1a-f29e-119d-da5eada7ed6a@edri.org>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
 <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
Message-ID: <4e605151-dff1-7465-af95-3b6e3991e50c@kathykleiman.com>

Good comment. Well prepared and well reasoned. Tx to Ayden and all who 
wrote and commented.

(Quick  note that this lousy procedure was passed in the "bad old 
days"of ICANN when some of stakeholders did not believe that data 
protection laws applied to Whois data. How far we have come!)

Best, Kathy


On 7/6/2017 12:26 PM, avri doria wrote:
> (observer)
>
> thanks for making the latest changes.
>
> i think it is fine to go and getting better.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 06-Jul-17 08:22, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>> The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow, therefore
>> your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please let me
>> know. Thank you!
>>
>> - Ayden
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>>> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
>>> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>
>>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re:
>>> handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>
>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>
>>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment.
>>>> The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and
>>>> it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>;
>>>> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to
>>>> the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>
>>>>> Maryant, hi-
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi
>>>>> may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS
>>>>> conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if
>>>>> we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the
>>>>> comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able
>>>>> to review them. Thanks again!
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can't promise
>>>>>> anything at this stage because it wasn't foreseen in our work
>>>>>> schedule, but I'll try my best.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its
>>>>>>> impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>> <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in
>>>>>>>      EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its
>>>>>>>      implementation.
>>>>>>>      I'm aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>>>>      What's the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>>>      Maryant
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      --
>>>>>>>      Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>      Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>>      European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>>      20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>>      1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>>      https://edri.org
>>>>>>>      Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>>>>>>>      PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>>      @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>>>>      Hello all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the
>>>>>>>>      updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with
>>>>>>>>      Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are
>>>>>>>>      new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is
>>>>>>>>      warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
>>>>>>>>      hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this
>>>>>>>>      date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a
>>>>>>>>      week's time. Thank you!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>      <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>>      Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>      for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>>      Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>      UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>      From: icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>
>>>>>>>>>      To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>>>      <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the
>>>>>>>>>      effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>      <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en>
>>>>>>>>>      for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly
>>>>>>>>>      welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we
>>>>>>>>>      can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>>      <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in
>>>>>>>>>      30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy
>>>>>>>>>      Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I
>>>>>>>>>      kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if
>>>>>>>>>      you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>>      linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>>>>>>>>      <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70
>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc



From pileleji at ymca.gm  Thu Jul  6 19:45:49 2017
From: pileleji at ymca.gm (Poncelet Ileleji)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:45:49 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
 Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <4e605151-dff1-7465-af95-3b6e3991e50c@kathykleiman.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <frLx058kwjQ2cYsSRdgKJe0DfDbZ6HySDhxeuY4AolxMB8buUFSC6pGmPOgQoMxPnVsAP0OC9FcekMRJYvwQ1AAgrpbhSw8VjrpJuCUlFe0=@ferdeline.com>
 <3c906cbf-bc1a-f29e-119d-da5eada7ed6a@edri.org>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
 <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
 <4e605151-dff1-7465-af95-3b6e3991e50c@kathykleiman.com>
Message-ID: <CAEux40vUsE8PQAB3AfGqyYE_RhmC5B1w=2U=FTf4F5xbg64TfA@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Kathy,

Definitely +++1 all the way on this one, congrats to Ayden and all others
who helped finalise the comments.

Kind Regards


Poncelet

On 6 July 2017 at 16:43, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com> wrote:

> Good comment. Well prepared and well reasoned. Tx to Ayden and all who
> wrote and commented.
>
> (Quick  note that this lousy procedure was passed in the "bad old days"of
> ICANN when some of stakeholders did not believe that data protection laws
> applied to Whois data. How far we have come!)
>
> Best, Kathy
>
>
> On 7/6/2017 12:26 PM, avri doria wrote:
>
>> (observer)
>>
>> thanks for making the latest changes.
>>
>> i think it is fine to go and getting better.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> On 06-Jul-17 08:22, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>>
>>> The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow, therefore
>>> your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please let me
>>> know. Thank you!
>>>
>>> - Ayden
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>>>> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
>>>> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>
>>>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re:
>>>> handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5
>>>> O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>>
>>>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment.
>>>>> The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and
>>>>> it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
>>>>> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>;
>>>>> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to
>>>>> the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maryant, hi-
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi
>>>>>> may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS
>>>>>> conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if
>>>>>> we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the
>>>>>> comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able
>>>>>> to review them. Thanks again!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can't promise
>>>>>>> anything at this stage because it wasn't foreseen in our work
>>>>>>> schedule, but I'll try my best.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its
>>>>>>>> impacts https://schedule.icann.org/eve
>>>>>>>> nt/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-
>>>>>>>> solutions
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>> <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
>>>>>>>> <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in
>>>>>>>>      EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its
>>>>>>>>      implementation.
>>>>>>>>      I'm aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>>>>>      What's the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>>>>      Maryant
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      --
>>>>>>>>      Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>>      Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>>>      European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>>>      20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>>>      1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>>>      https://edri.org
>>>>>>>>      Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>>>>>>>>      PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>>>      @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital
>>>>>>>> rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      Hello all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the
>>>>>>>>>      updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with
>>>>>>>>>      Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are
>>>>>>>>>      new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is
>>>>>>>>>      warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
>>>>>>>>>      hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this
>>>>>>>>>      date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a
>>>>>>>>>      week's time. Thank you!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
>>>>>>>>> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>>      <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S
>>>>>>>>> _5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>>>      Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>>      for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>>>      Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>>      UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>>      From: icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>
>>>>>>>>>>      To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>>>>      <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>      Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>      I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the
>>>>>>>>>>      effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>>      <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-
>>>>>>>>>> law-2017-05-03-en>
>>>>>>>>>>      for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly
>>>>>>>>>>      welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we
>>>>>>>>>>      can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>      https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
>>>>>>>>>> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>>>      <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S
>>>>>>>>>> _5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>      The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in
>>>>>>>>>>      30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy
>>>>>>>>>>      Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I
>>>>>>>>>>      kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if
>>>>>>>>>>      you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>      Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>      Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>>>      linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>>>>>>>>>      <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70
>>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital
>>>>>>> rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>



-- 
Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
Coordinator
The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
MDI Road Kanifing South
P. O. Box 421 Banjul
The Gambia, West Africa
Tel: (220) 4370240
Fax:(220) 4390793
Cell:(220) 9912508
Skype: pons_utd






*www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm>http://jokkolabs.net/en/
<http://jokkolabs.net/en/>www.waigf.org
<http://www.waigf.org>www,insistglobal.com <http://www.itag.gm>www.npoc.org
<http://www.npoc.org>http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753
<http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753>*www.diplointernetgovernance.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170706/ceb46c52/attachment.htm>

From matthew at intpolicy.com  Thu Jul  6 20:03:19 2017
From: matthew at intpolicy.com (Matthew Shears)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 18:03:19 +0100
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
 Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <frLx058kwjQ2cYsSRdgKJe0DfDbZ6HySDhxeuY4AolxMB8buUFSC6pGmPOgQoMxPnVsAP0OC9FcekMRJYvwQ1AAgrpbhSw8VjrpJuCUlFe0=@ferdeline.com>
 <3c906cbf-bc1a-f29e-119d-da5eada7ed6a@edri.org>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
 <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
Message-ID: <6a87d567-cb07-eba2-c08a-f0bbd4f958d6@intpolicy.com>

Ayden - thanks for shepherding this along.  I think it is good to go also.


On 06/07/2017 17:26, avri doria wrote:
> (observer)
>
> thanks for making the latest changes.
>
> i think it is fine to go and getting better.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 06-Jul-17 08:22, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>> The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow, therefore
>> your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please let me
>> know. Thank you!
>>
>> - Ayden
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>>> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
>>> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>
>>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re:
>>> handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>
>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>
>>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment.
>>>> The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and
>>>> it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>;
>>>> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to
>>>> the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>
>>>>> Maryant, hi-
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi
>>>>> may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS
>>>>> conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if
>>>>> we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the
>>>>> comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able
>>>>> to review them. Thanks again!
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can't promise
>>>>>> anything at this stage because it wasn't foreseen in our work
>>>>>> schedule, but I'll try my best.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its
>>>>>>> impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>> <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
>>>>>>> <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in
>>>>>>>      EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its
>>>>>>>      implementation.
>>>>>>>      I'm aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>>>>      What's the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>>>      Maryant
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      --
>>>>>>>      Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>      Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>>      European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>>      20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>>      1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>>      https://edri.org
>>>>>>>      Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>>>>>>>      PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>>      @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>>>>      Hello all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the
>>>>>>>>      updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with
>>>>>>>>      Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are
>>>>>>>>      new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is
>>>>>>>>      warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
>>>>>>>>      hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this
>>>>>>>>      date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a
>>>>>>>>      week's time. Thank you!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>      <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>>      Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>      for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>>      Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>      UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>      From: icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>
>>>>>>>>>      To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>>>      <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the
>>>>>>>>>      effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>      <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en>
>>>>>>>>>      for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly
>>>>>>>>>      welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we
>>>>>>>>>      can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>>      <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in
>>>>>>>>>      30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy
>>>>>>>>>      Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I
>>>>>>>>>      kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if
>>>>>>>>>      you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>>      linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>>>>>>>>      <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70
>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com

-- 
Matthew Shears
matthew at intpolicy.com
+447712472987
Skype:mshears



From icann at ferdeline.com  Fri Jul  7 01:04:02 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 18:04:02 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] GNSO Chair election timeline and
	incoming councilors
In-Reply-To: <C992FAE7-A759-45A8-8B9B-133DAF50AA98@gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=bwoc8p=E+8EaQHYmbOhydYU843ezFRqdwgDDg=fGarA@mail.gmail.com>
 <C992FAE7-A759-45A8-8B9B-133DAF50AA98@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0j6CXlphtArfK1WMAr675psaXHs8Ehy5LLeCD1G1cbxuxw9BfvUBBBhhtEFNNBUYN6X2yJErruDCm9O636L3OUEF95AakDP6pzl0FZumOio=@ferdeline.com>

I'd like to nominate Rafik Dammak, if he would be willing to undertake the obligation (burden?) of chairing the GNSO Council. I trust his commitment to the NCSG and ICANN more broadly is well known to all on this mailing list.
Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] GNSO Chair election timeline and incoming councilors
> Local Time: July 6, 2017 2:12 PM
> UTC Time: July 6, 2017 1:12 PM
> From: mpsilvavalent at gmail.com
> To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
> Hi Rafik,
> Do we have already an idea of possible nominees or nominees we want to promote?
> Cheers,
> Mart?n
>
>> On Jul 6, 2017, at 9:00 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>> reminder about the GNSO chair election timeline. We will have probably soon some discussion with CSG about the nomination of a candidate from NCPH to chair position (but also for the vice-chair).
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>
>> Date: 2017-07-06 20:15 GMT+09:00
>> Subject: [council] GNSO Chair election timeline and incoming councilors
>> To: "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
>> Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Please see attached the timeline for the GNSO Chair nomination open date and election.
>>
>> Please remember that new councilors are eligible for nomination as Council chair so the Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies? elections should be over by the date of nominations. New councilors are to be announced on the 1st September 2017.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Nathalie
>>
>> Nathalie Peregrine
>> <2017 GNSO Chair Election Timeline.pdf>_______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170706/49b59e90/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Fri Jul  7 14:09:29 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 07:09:29 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
	Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <6a87d567-cb07-eba2-c08a-f0bbd4f958d6@intpolicy.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
 <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
 <6a87d567-cb07-eba2-c08a-f0bbd4f958d6@intpolicy.com>
Message-ID: <VDfo0zMHTUR1pFsuyu5fXtVC8Hi4Wra4wP08SK1lLsWB7r991SVGyg2iGVxJUzPLW2kISqtoTUBr8h87MoOIdexnPjytaiaiw2KAbD8KB_s=@ferdeline.com>

Thanks. So we now have support from Matthew, Stephanie, Rafik, Poncelet, and myself. We also have support to submit this comment from observers Avri and Kathy. The submission deadline is in a few hours time; Tapani, Marilia, Martin, and Stefi, have you any concerns or suggested edits, or can I go ahead and submit this comment?

Best wishes, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: July 6, 2017 6:03 PM
> UTC Time: July 6, 2017 5:03 PM
> From: matthew at intpolicy.com
> To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
> Ayden - thanks for shepherding this along. I think it is good to go also.
> On 06/07/2017 17:26, avri doria wrote:
>> (observer)
>>
>> thanks for making the latest changes.
>>
>> i think it is fine to go and getting better.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> On 06-Jul-17 08:22, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>>> The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow, therefore
>>> your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please let me
>>> know. Thank you!
>>>
>>> - Ayden
>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>>>> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
>>>> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>
>>>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re:
>>>> handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>>
>>>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment.
>>>>> The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and
>>>>> it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>;
>>>>> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to
>>>>> the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maryant, hi-
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi
>>>>>> may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS
>>>>>> conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if
>>>>>> we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the
>>>>>> comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able
>>>>>> to review them. Thanks again!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I"ve set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can"t promise
>>>>>>> anything at this stage because it wasn"t foreseen in our work
>>>>>>> schedule, but I"ll try my best.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its
>>>>>>>> impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>> <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
>>>>>>>> <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in
>>>>>>>> EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its
>>>>>>>> implementation.
>>>>>>>> I"m aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>>>>> What"s the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>>>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the
>>>>>>>>> updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with
>>>>>>>>> Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are
>>>>>>>>> new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is
>>>>>>>>> warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
>>>>>>>>> hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this
>>>>>>>>> date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a
>>>>>>>>> week"s time. Thank you!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>>> Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>> UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>> From: icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>
>>>>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the
>>>>>>>>>> effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en>
>>>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly
>>>>>>>>>> welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we
>>>>>>>>>> can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in
>>>>>>>>>> 30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy
>>>>>>>>>> Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I
>>>>>>>>>> kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if
>>>>>>>>>> you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70
>>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.com
> --
> Matthew Shears
> matthew at intpolicy.com
> +447712472987
> Skype:mshears
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170707/c00634ac/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Fri Jul  7 14:38:37 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 20:38:37 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
 Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <VDfo0zMHTUR1pFsuyu5fXtVC8Hi4Wra4wP08SK1lLsWB7r991SVGyg2iGVxJUzPLW2kISqtoTUBr8h87MoOIdexnPjytaiaiw2KAbD8KB_s=@ferdeline.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sThma7hJRBYQYdN7=ZZ47+jYOP6rEiNA6nyPb4r2rOkWrTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
 <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
 <6a87d567-cb07-eba2-c08a-f0bbd4f958d6@intpolicy.com>
 <VDfo0zMHTUR1pFsuyu5fXtVC8Hi4Wra4wP08SK1lLsWB7r991SVGyg2iGVxJUzPLW2kISqtoTUBr8h87MoOIdexnPjytaiaiw2KAbD8KB_s=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh==fYvftgWYVyDbZbjJgCOt4q_ECFddQkrQzEmvu3ouVQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ayden,

the draft was shared for a while and get several inputs for NCSG members. I
didn't see any objection. I think it is ready to be submitted if you can
share the latest clean version.

Best,

Rafik

2017-07-07 20:09 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:

> Thanks. So we now have support from Matthew, Stephanie, Rafik, Poncelet,
> and myself. We also have support to submit this comment from observers Avri
> and Kathy. The submission deadline is in a few hours time; Tapani, Marilia,
> Martin, and Stefi, have you any concerns or suggested edits, or can I go
> ahead and submit this comment?
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: July 6, 2017 6:03 PM
> UTC Time: July 6, 2017 5:03 PM
> From: matthew at intpolicy.com
> To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>
> Ayden - thanks for shepherding this along. I think it is good to go also.
>
>
> On 06/07/2017 17:26, avri doria wrote:
> > (observer)
> >
> > thanks for making the latest changes.
> >
> > i think it is fine to go and getting better.
> >
> > avri
> >
> >
> > On 06-Jul-17 08:22, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
> >> The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow, therefore
> >> your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please let me
> >> know. Thank you!
> >>
> >> - Ayden
> >>
> >>> -------- Original Message --------
> >>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
> >>> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> >>> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
> >>> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
> >>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
> >>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
> >>>
> >>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re:
> >>> handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
> >>>
> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
> >>>
> >>> Best wishes, Ayden
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> -------- Original Message --------
> >>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
> >>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> >>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
> >>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
> >>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
> >>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
> >>>>
> >>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment.
> >>>> The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and
> >>>> it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
> >>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>;
> >>>> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to
> >>>> the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
> >>>>
> >>>> Best wishes, Ayden
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> -------- Original Message --------
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
> >>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> >>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
> >>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
> >>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
> >>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
> >>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Maryant, hi-
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi
> >>>>> may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS
> >>>>> conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if
> >>>>> we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the
> >>>>> comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able
> >>>>> to review them. Thanks again!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
> >>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
> >>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> >>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
> >>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
> >>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
> >>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I"ve set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
> >>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can"t promise
> >>>>>> anything at this stage because it wasn"t foreseen in our work
> >>>>>> schedule, but I"ll try my best.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> Maryant
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
> >>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
> >>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
> >>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its
> >>>>>>> impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-
> potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Rafik
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez
> >>>>>>> <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
> >>>>>>> <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>>:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Ayden & all,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in
> >>>>>>> EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its
> >>>>>>> implementation.
> >>>>>>> I"m aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
> >>>>>>> What"s the last internal deadline to comment on it?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks and best regards,
> >>>>>>> Maryant
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
> >>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
> >>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
> >>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
> >>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
> >>>>>>> https://edri.org
> >>>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
> <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
> >>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
> >>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital
> rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
> >>>>>>>> Hello all,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the
> >>>>>>>> updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with
> >>>>>>>> Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are
> >>>>>>>> new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is
> >>>>>>>> warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
> >>>>>>>> hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this
> >>>>>>>> date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a
> >>>>>>>> week"s time. Thank you!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
> >>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
> >>>>>>>>> Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
> >>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> >>>>>>>>> Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
> >>>>>>>>> UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
> >>>>>>>>> From: icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>
> >>>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> >>>>>>>>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Dear colleagues,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the
> >>>>>>>>> effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure
> >>>>>>>>> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-
> 2017-05-03-en>
> >>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly
> >>>>>>>>> welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we
> >>>>>>>>> can strengthen this comment.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
> >>>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_
> 5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in
> >>>>>>>>> 30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy
> >>>>>>>>> Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I
> >>>>>>>>> kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if
> >>>>>>>>> you can please. Thanks!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
> >>>>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
> >>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
> >>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
> >>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
> >>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
> >>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
> >>>>>> https://edri.org
> >>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
> >>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
> >>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital
> rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
> >>>>>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NCSG-PC mailing list
> >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NCSG-PC mailing list
> > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > http://www.avg.com
>
> --
> Matthew Shears
> matthew at intpolicy.com
> +447712472987 <+44%207712%20472987>
> Skype:mshears
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170707/100c3c80/attachment.htm>

From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca  Fri Jul  7 15:50:40 2017
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 08:50:40 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
 Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh==fYvftgWYVyDbZbjJgCOt4q_ECFddQkrQzEmvu3ouVQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <4674d279-db36-8caa-0c65-4cbc4e90d862@edri.org>
 <YBvo38gMu7vBHxM1-dzVMvCFlDGzI5PrA0XCc9YyxASgB-0ZZQlOIh-vbgVt2Z_0vEP5_-B8LIl8X2LnN6j702pmBetNr4gXeu4Mfl2LECk=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
 <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
 <6a87d567-cb07-eba2-c08a-f0bbd4f958d6@intpolicy.com>
 <VDfo0zMHTUR1pFsuyu5fXtVC8Hi4Wra4wP08SK1lLsWB7r991SVGyg2iGVxJUzPLW2kISqtoTUBr8h87MoOIdexnPjytaiaiw2KAbD8KB_s=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh==fYvftgWYVyDbZbjJgCOt4q_ECFddQkrQzEmvu3ouVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <84ec9835-3f8f-c6fb-4b7d-3f64fe1817c3@mail.utoronto.ca>

I agree, don't miss the deadline.  Thanks for coordinating Ayden!!!

Steph


On 2017-07-07 07:38, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi Ayden,
>
> the draft was shared for a while and get several inputs for NCSG 
> members. I didn't see any objection. I think it is ready to be 
> submitted if you can share the latest clean version.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2017-07-07 20:09 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com 
> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>
>     Thanks. So we now have support from Matthew, Stephanie, Rafik,
>     Poncelet, and myself. We also have support to submit this comment
>     from observers Avri and Kathy. The submission deadline is in a few
>     hours time; Tapani, Marilia, Martin, and Stefi, have you any
>     concerns or suggested edits, or can I go ahead and submit this
>     comment?
>
>     Best wishes, Ayden
>
>
>>     -------- Original Message --------
>>     Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on
>>     ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>     Local Time: July 6, 2017 6:03 PM
>>     UTC Time: July 6, 2017 5:03 PM
>>     From: matthew at intpolicy.com <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>
>>     To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>
>>     Ayden - thanks for shepherding this along. I think it is good to
>>     go also.
>>
>>
>>     On 06/07/2017 17:26, avri doria wrote:
>>     > (observer)
>>     >
>>     > thanks for making the latest changes.
>>     >
>>     > i think it is fine to go and getting better.
>>     >
>>     > avri
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > On 06-Jul-17 08:22, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>>     >> The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow,
>>     therefore
>>     >> your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please
>>     let me
>>     >> know. Thank you!
>>     >>
>>     >> - Ayden
>>     >>
>>     >>> -------- Original Message --------
>>     >>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on
>>     ICANN
>>     >>> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>     >>> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
>>     >>> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
>>     >>> From: icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>
>>     >>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>>     <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>     >>>
>>     >>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re:
>>     >>> handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>>     >>>
>>     >>>
>>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>     >>>
>>     >>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>     >>>
>>     >>>
>>     >>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>     >>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>>     Procedure
>>     >>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>     >>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>>     >>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>>     >>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>
>>     >>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>>     <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this
>>     comment.
>>     >>>> The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days
>>     time, and
>>     >>>> it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
>>     >>>>
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>>;
>>     >>>> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in
>>     regards to
>>     >>>> the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>     >>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>>     Procedure for
>>     >>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>     >>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>     >>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>     >>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>
>>     >>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>     <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>     <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>>
>>     >>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>     <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>     <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>     <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>>> Maryant, hi-
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear
>>     that EDRi
>>     >>>>> may be able to provide input into this comment on handling
>>     WHOIS
>>     >>>>> conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile,
>>     so if
>>     >>>>> we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours
>>     before the
>>     >>>>> comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should
>>     be able
>>     >>>>> to review them. Thanks again!
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>>> Best wishes,
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>     >>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>     <http://linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>     <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>     <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>>
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>     >>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>>     Procedure for
>>     >>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>     >>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>     >>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>     >>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>     <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>     >>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>     <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>     >>>>>>
>>     >>>>>> Hi,
>>     >>>>>>
>>     >>>>>> I"ve set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30
>>     June COB.
>>     >>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can"t promise
>>     >>>>>> anything at this stage because it wasn"t foreseen in our work
>>     >>>>>> schedule, but I"ll try my best.
>>     >>>>>>
>>     >>>>>> Thanks,
>>     >>>>>> Maryant
>>     >>>>>>
>>     >>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>     >>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>     >>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>     >>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its
>>     >>>>>>> impacts
>>     https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>     <https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions>
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> Best,
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> Rafik
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>     >>>>>>> <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
>>     <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>
>>     >>>>>>> <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
>>     <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>>>:
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> Hi Ayden & all,
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in
>>     >>>>>>> EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its
>>     >>>>>>> implementation.
>>     >>>>>>> I"m aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>     >>>>>>> What"s the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>     >>>>>>> Maryant
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> --
>>     >>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>     >>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>     >>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>     >>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>     >>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>     >>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>     >>>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>>     <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>>     >>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>     >>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of
>>     digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>> Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>     >>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>     >>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>> I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the
>>     >>>>>>>> updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with
>>     >>>>>>>> Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are
>>     >>>>>>>> new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is
>>     >>>>>>>> warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
>>     >>>>>>>> hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this
>>     >>>>>>>> date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a
>>     >>>>>>>> week"s time. Thank you!
>>     >>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>
>>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>     >>>>>>>>
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>>
>>     >>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>     >>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>     >>>>>>>>> Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>     >>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>     >>>>>>>>> Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>     >>>>>>>>> UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>     >>>>>>>>> From: icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>
>>     <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>>
>>     >>>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>     <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>     >>>>>>>>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>     <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>> I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the
>>     >>>>>>>>> effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en
>>     <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en>>
>>     >>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly
>>     >>>>>>>>> welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we
>>     >>>>>>>>> can strengthen this comment.
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>>
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>> The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in
>>     >>>>>>>>> 30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy
>>     >>>>>>>>> Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I
>>     >>>>>>>>> kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if
>>     >>>>>>>>> you can please. Thanks!
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>     >>>>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>     <http://linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>     >>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>     <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>>
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>>>
>>     >>>>>> --
>>     >>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>     >>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>     >>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>     >>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>     >>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>     >>>>>> https://edri.org
>>     >>>>>> Tel: +32 2 274 25 70 <tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>
>>     >>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>     >>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>     >>>>>>
>>     >>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>     >>>>>>
>>     >>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of
>>     digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>     >>>>>>
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>     >> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>     >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>>     >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>     >
>>     > ---
>>     > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
>>     software.
>>     > https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>     >
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > NCSG-PC mailing list
>>     > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>>     > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > ---
>>     > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>>     > http://www.avg.com
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Matthew Shears
>>     matthew at intpolicy.com <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>
>>     +447712472987 <tel:+44%207712%20472987>
>>     Skype:mshears
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     NCSG-PC mailing list
>>     NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>>     https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     NCSG-PC mailing list
>     NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>     https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170707/ab886fb5/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Fri Jul  7 15:55:05 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 08:55:05 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
	Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
In-Reply-To: <84ec9835-3f8f-c6fb-4b7d-3f64fe1817c3@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <9Uk4_cfmLnBse0hWrekYPHE6sDSu8Kird4h66a4JPc-t8ROobpaWLAn8QfHFWUjE0Nio1x9rLLqllpeuwyaOCZw5vPcCxrbbR4ZZSoj5bJ0=@ferdeline.com>
 <mn4RVF9GBglJr3lekWmIB71KyVIwSrPcusKV3J-VPe45z-0HRO_2zr_GVe5iOq_wk2FrSzoDdb_KQiV3-GmUWbudMxthSUOuZQ7bv858Mik=@ferdeline.com>
 <dkwxMS15itkYCCiV_ylrUsudq8VS_8zWg9Gs6fJus9zxlWTliXwD7WFxWbU1PQluLIVxBeu5K6OyzHvtMS0FEcNHdmEI7oy2Xw11EiogChk=@ferdeline.com>
 <2eAXjKP6mjHjNjul5ITuau20kzZh9dWWwd7BJ5iaNITCEKrMKw4SL7Dn3fZGGPbUJniBKA-Xj2C5lZxwAj9G_4tw_265JkKEWKsBlDnq0Gw=@ferdeline.com>
 <bd244440-5757-e478-450e-62afa8366852@apc.org>
 <6a87d567-cb07-eba2-c08a-f0bbd4f958d6@intpolicy.com>
 <VDfo0zMHTUR1pFsuyu5fXtVC8Hi4Wra4wP08SK1lLsWB7r991SVGyg2iGVxJUzPLW2kISqtoTUBr8h87MoOIdexnPjytaiaiw2KAbD8KB_s=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh==fYvftgWYVyDbZbjJgCOt4q_ECFddQkrQzEmvu3ouVQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <84ec9835-3f8f-c6fb-4b7d-3f64fe1817c3@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <i1ZTjKsViHJphw-tKj-aq4y5JEUIDD1jKMrnxO80nqfHJKF2fdVw_FILHFgLYNeArr3cc6NNEZugK5cAVJoYU--lMLODO6Gp8T2hKIe3PFA=@ferdeline.com>

Thanks all, attached is what I will submit momentarily.

Best wishes, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> Local Time: July 7, 2017 1:50 PM
> UTC Time: July 7, 2017 12:50 PM
> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
> To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>
> I agree, don't miss the deadline. Thanks for coordinating Ayden!!!
>
> Steph
>
> On 2017-07-07 07:38, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>
>> Hi Ayden,
>>
>> the draft was shared for a while and get several inputs for NCSG members. I didn't see any objection. I think it is ready to be submitted if you can share the latest clean version.
>> Best,
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2017-07-07 20:09 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
>>
>>> Thanks. So we now have support from Matthew, Stephanie, Rafik, Poncelet, and myself. We also have support to submit this comment from observers Avri and Kathy. The submission deadline is in a few hours time; Tapani, Marilia, Martin, and Stefi, have you any concerns or suggested edits, or can I go ahead and submit this comment?
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>> Local Time: July 6, 2017 6:03 PM
>>>> UTC Time: July 6, 2017 5:03 PM
>>>> From: matthew at intpolicy.com
>>>> To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> Ayden - thanks for shepherding this along. I think it is good to go also.
>>>> On 06/07/2017 17:26, avri doria wrote:
>>>>> (observer)
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks for making the latest changes.
>>>>>
>>>>> i think it is fine to go and getting better.
>>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06-Jul-17 08:22, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>>>>>> The deadline for the submission of this comment is tomorrow, therefore
>>>>>> your urgent review is needed. Any questions or concerns please let me
>>>>>> know. Thank you!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Ayden
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN
>>>>>>> Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>> Local Time: July 3, 2017 5:00 PM
>>>>>>> UTC Time: July 3, 2017 4:00 PM
>>>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A reminder, please, that we need feedback on this comment re:
>>>>>>> handling WHOIS conflicts with privacy law. Thank you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>> Subject: Fw: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 12:55 PM
>>>>>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:55 AM
>>>>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would be great to receive some feedback from EDRi on this comment.
>>>>>>>> The submission deadline for this comment is in seven days time, and
>>>>>>>> it still needs work. Please see the Google Doc here
>>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>;
>>>>>>>> your suggested edits are warmly welcomed, especially in regards to
>>>>>>>> the recommendation(s). Thanks very much!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>> Local Time: June 30, 2017 1:53 PM
>>>>>>>>> UTC Time: June 30, 2017 11:53 AM
>>>>>>>>> From: icann at ferdeline.com
>>>>>>>>> To: Maryant Fernandez Perez <maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG>
>>>>>>>>> NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maryant, hi-
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you very much for your email. I am pleased to hear that EDRi
>>>>>>>>> may be able to provide input into this comment on handling WHOIS
>>>>>>>>> conflicts with privacy laws. Our Policy Committee is agile, so if
>>>>>>>>> we receive comments or suggested edits up to 72 hours before the
>>>>>>>>> comment submission deadline of 7 July 23:59 UTC, we should be able
>>>>>>>>> to review them. Thanks again!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure for
>>>>>>>>>> Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>>> Local Time: June 28, 2017 1:11 PM
>>>>>>>>>> UTC Time: June 28, 2017 11:11 AM
>>>>>>>>>> From: maryant.fernandez-perez at EDRI.ORG
>>>>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I"ve set our own internal deadline for this Friday, 30 June COB.
>>>>>>>>>> I hope to be able to get back to you by then. I can"t promise
>>>>>>>>>> anything at this stage because it wasn"t foreseen in our work
>>>>>>>>>> schedule, but I"ll try my best.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Le 28/06/17 ? 13:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit :
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Maryant,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> thanks for message, it will be great to get more feedback
>>>>>>>>>>> any idea by when you can get input from EDRI members?
>>>>>>>>>>> btw there was a public session yesterday about GDPR and its
>>>>>>>>>>> impacts https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3ot/gdpr-and-its-potential-impact-looking-for-practical-solutions
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-06-28 19:46 GMT+09:00 Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>>>>> <maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org
>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:maryant.fernandez-perez at edri.org>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ayden & all,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Some of EDRi members may be willing to provide input, as in
>>>>>>>>>>> EDRi we have extensively worked on the GDPR and in its
>>>>>>>>>>> implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>> I"m aware the the official deadline is 7 July.
>>>>>>>>>>> What"s the last internal deadline to comment on it?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Maryant
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>>>>>>> Tel: [+32 2 274 25 70](tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070) [<tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070>](tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070)
>>>>>>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Le 14/06/17 ? 00:05, Ayden F?rdeline a ?crit :
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have revised our draft comment on the effectiveness of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> updated ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with
>>>>>>>>>>>> Privacy Law. Paragraphs 3 and 7, in particular, are
>>>>>>>>>>>> new. Your review of and feedback on this proposed comment is
>>>>>>>>>>>> warmly welcomed. The submission deadline is 7 July, but I am
>>>>>>>>>>>> hoping we may be able to finalise the comment before this
>>>>>>>>>>>> date, given we have ICANN 59 approaching in just over a
>>>>>>>>>>>> week"s time. Thank you!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [DRAFT] Potential NCSG Comment on ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Local Time: May 13, 2017 8:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC Time: May 13, 2017 7:36 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: icann at FERDELINE.COM <mailto:icann at FERDELINE.COM>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have drafted a comment on behalf of the NCSG on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> effectiveness of the updated ICANN Procedure
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/whois-privacy-law-2017-05-03-en>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law. I warmly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> welcome your comments, suggestions, and edits so that we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can strengthen this comment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lA-O2jiPv5JMoCYpG5HD0S_5O3yaiYkoRvfll3YsTX4/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The deadline for submission of comments on this topic is in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 30 days, on 12 June. I would like to get this to the Policy
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Committee to review one week earlier, on 5 June, so I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> kindly ask that you make your comments before this time if
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can please. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>>>>>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Maryant Fernandez Perez
>>>>>>>>>> Senior Policy Advisor
>>>>>>>>>> European Digital Rights (EDRi)
>>>>>>>>>> 20 Rue Belliard
>>>>>>>>>> 1040 Brussels (Belgium)
>>>>>>>>>> https://edri.org
>>>>>>>>>> Tel: [+32 2 274 25 70](tel:+32%202%20274%2025%2070)
>>>>>>>>>> PGP: D59A 1D3F 50CC 231B DCFE 3F2C 92FA 6F29 3D74 0B42
>>>>>>>>>> @edri | @maryantfp
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Donate to EDRi! https://edri.org/donate/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Subscribe to the EDRi-gram, our fortnightly roundup of digital rights news! http://edri.org/newsletters/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>>>>> http://www.avg.com
>>>> --
>>>> Matthew Shears
>>>> matthew at intpolicy.com
>>>> [+447712472987](tel:+44%207712%20472987)
>>>> Skype:mshears
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170707/2da7f4da/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ProposedNCSGComment-ProcedureforHandlingWHOISConflictswithPrivacyLaw.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 146772 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170707/2da7f4da/attachment.pdf>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Tue Jul 11 22:27:59 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 15:27:59 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] A question about process
Message-ID: <2MoFDpYdVoNVl9B6y1UmvMBPqQsUdjxIy0gvs-89FkWRMULSYxgHEVfQnwl0tjxBn7HFrCO56Z1qsXWMrZUYQonOl6LOP0_Qxqd8VirvxNA=@ferdeline.com>

We spend a lot of time drafting and submitting statements.
I was wondering, are we circling back to make sure our comments are accurately captured in the staff summaries of each public comment exercise?

Maybe we are [though I have not been personally], but if we are not, we might want to consider adding this step to the internal operating procedure that Rafik drafted some time ago that could guide us in future public comment development.

Thanks, Ayden F?rdeline
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170711/3cad581b/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Wed Jul 12 02:17:00 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 08:17:00 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] A question about process
In-Reply-To: <2MoFDpYdVoNVl9B6y1UmvMBPqQsUdjxIy0gvs-89FkWRMULSYxgHEVfQnwl0tjxBn7HFrCO56Z1qsXWMrZUYQonOl6LOP0_Qxqd8VirvxNA=@ferdeline.com>
References: <2MoFDpYdVoNVl9B6y1UmvMBPqQsUdjxIy0gvs-89FkWRMULSYxgHEVfQnwl0tjxBn7HFrCO56Z1qsXWMrZUYQonOl6LOP0_Qxqd8VirvxNA=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThnnMuSQE4vgxB+cvUBsdaFp84SU-VxBq3LX4-nFQwP0vQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ayden,

thanks for the question,
we do that more on an ad-hoc basis by checking the staff report. for
example,  we submitted some comments after the deadline and so I checked if
our comments were listed and included in their reports. Indeed, that should
be more systematic and included in the process to review the staff
summaries. it is more challenging to monitor how working groups handle the
comments later and we depend on our active members there.

as I mentioned yesterday in NCSG Policy call, I would like to resume the
discussion on Policy Committee processes and procedures (
https://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/2017-May/000547.html) including the
one regarding public comments. Another feedback I got regarding NCSG
comments is to have a template for our public comments like the business
constituency do and include some generic text there (like the introduction
about NCSG etc). That will help for kicking the drafting and also adding
some information for documenting the comment. I will circulate the previous
draft for the comments process I did before. I also volunteered to work on
NCSG PC processes and share a draft but other volunteers are welcome.

Best,

Rafik

2017-07-12 4:27 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:

> We spend a lot of time drafting and submitting statements.
>
> I was wondering, are we circling back to make sure our comments are
> accurately captured in the staff summaries of each public comment exercise?
>
> Maybe we are [though I have not been personally], but if we are not, we
> might want to consider adding this step to the internal operating procedure
> that Rafik drafted some time ago that could guide us in future public
> comment development.
>
> Thanks, Ayden F?rdeline
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170712/8eae1ce6/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Thu Jul 13 17:19:54 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 10:19:54 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
Message-ID: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>

Hi all,

As a part of the Next Generation Registration Directory Service to Replace WHOIS Policy Development Process Working Group (RDS PDP WG), members have been asked to respond to a lengthy 40-question poll and to provide thoughtful rationale for and against potential data elements which go beyond those included in the tentative minimum public data set.

Here is a link to a handout that was recently circulated which contains information about each of the proposed data elements: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086729/28JunePoll-DataElements-ExpandedHandout.pdf

The deadline for responding to this poll in our personal capacity is this Saturday, 15 July. The poll results will be used to inform deliberation during our WG call on 18 July.

I suggested on our PC call earlier this week that we should coordinate our response here and, as best we can, present a united front on which data elements we support and which we do not. Of course this is only a suggested path forward and WG members are free to respond to the poll as they wish. But if you would like to join me in developing a common position, I have created a Google Doc for us to use and encourage all RDS PDP WG members to help craft our position.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharing
I warmly welcome your input ? please log into your Google account before responding (or add your name to the end of your comment) in case clarification is required. Thank you.
Best wishes,
Ayden F?rdeline
[linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](https://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170713/0fdd04cd/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Fri Jul 14 02:32:09 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 08:32:09 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] CCWG-IG motion amendments
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=nhNnZEXoBHV=tc5G7XmQYOAiRu6JF2679fFxQanHY-w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

as you know, we asked for the CCWG-IG motion to be deferred so we can
continue working on our amendments. that was supported by other groups like
IPC due to the short time we had since Johannesburg meeting.

Marilia, Farzaneh and I worked on making some amendments to the motion as
follow-up of our NCSG Policy call this week
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LQWVaEgppF38Gvnm9SpvftHpdhI1BOGdRdl_YyBe3oA/edit

we are sharing this so we can discuss them. we will also share them with
the wider NCSG list.

Best,

Rafik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170714/867c1a7c/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Fri Jul 14 09:02:27 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:02:27 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
In-Reply-To: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>
References: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=QebWpaygagKw2JnK77sfSK9exEWQ-gXOUdQ8Op-En1Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ayden,

Thanks for sharing this and the update.
while it is a tight deadline, I guess we can get ta least some common
response that the WG members from NCSG can use.

Best,

Rafik

2017-07-13 23:19 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:

> Hi all,
>
> As a part of the Next Generation Registration Directory Service to Replace
> WHOIS Policy Development Process Working Group (RDS PDP WG), members have
> been asked to respond to a lengthy 40-question poll and to provide
> thoughtful rationale for and against potential data elements which go
> beyond those included in the tentative minimum public data set.
>
> Here is a link to a handout that was recently circulated which contains
> information about each of the proposed data elements:
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086729/
> 28JunePoll-DataElements-ExpandedHandout.pdf
>
> The deadline for responding to this poll in our personal capacity is this
> Saturday, 15 July. The poll results will be used to inform deliberation
> during our WG call on 18 July.
>
> I suggested on our PC call earlier this week that we should coordinate our
> response here and, as best we can, present a united front on which data
> elements we support and which we do not. Of course this is only a suggested
> path forward and WG members are free to respond to the poll as they wish.
> But if you would like to join me in developing a common position, I have
> created a Google Doc for us to use and encourage all RDS PDP WG members to
> help craft our position.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo
> 7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharing
>
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharing>
> I warmly welcome your input ? please log into your Google account before
> responding (or add your name to the end of your comment) in case
> clarification is required. Thank you.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden F?rdeline
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <https://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170714/11cd6a15/attachment.htm>

From wendy at seltzer.com  Fri Jul 14 22:15:19 2017
From: wendy at seltzer.com (Wendy Seltzer)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:15:19 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
In-Reply-To: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>
References: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <377e5d3b-8a6a-a2cb-05e3-3938c3dc7f7d@seltzer.com>

On 07/13/2017 10:19 AM, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> As a part of the Next Generation Registration Directory Service to Replace WHOIS Policy Development Process Working Group (RDS PDP WG), members have been asked to respond to a lengthy 40-question poll and to provide thoughtful rationale for and against potential data elements which go beyond those included in the tentative minimum public data set.
> 
> Here is a link to a handout that was recently circulated which contains information about each of the proposed data elements: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086729/28JunePoll-DataElements-ExpandedHandout.pdf
> 
> The deadline for responding to this poll in our personal capacity is this Saturday, 15 July. The poll results will be used to inform deliberation during our WG call on 18 July.
> 
> I suggested on our PC call earlier this week that we should coordinate our response here and, as best we can, present a united front on which data elements we support and which we do not. Of course this is only a suggested path forward and WG members are free to respond to the poll as they wish. But if you would like to join me in developing a common position, I have created a Google Doc for us to use and encourage all RDS PDP WG members to help craft our position.
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharing
> I warmly welcome your input ? please log into your Google account before responding (or add your name to the end of your comment) in case clarification is required. Thank you.

Hi Ayden,

Is this meant to be responsive to the group's request for "user stories"
and the data elements they require?

--Wendy

> Best wishes,
> Ayden F?rdeline
> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](https://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
Strategy Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
https://wendy.seltzer.org/
https://www.lumendatabase.org/
https://www.torproject.org/


From icann at ferdeline.com  Fri Jul 14 22:18:10 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:18:10 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
In-Reply-To: <377e5d3b-8a6a-a2cb-05e3-3938c3dc7f7d@seltzer.com>
References: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>
 <377e5d3b-8a6a-a2cb-05e3-3938c3dc7f7d@seltzer.com>
Message-ID: <QgLJhC-oN_l-XcNCnk812cXMYKGHJOAlnFyOFEYc4I98L03TafdBOLsEwI9RAIVY1CUFOvOUgJXVkeV6M-AJvUQeD-eNzJ9txmzwgr39vn4=@ferdeline.com>

Hi Wendy,

No, this is an activity unrelated to our work on GDPR compliance, and is intended to help us respond to a poll currently being circulated to members of the GSNO working group (RDS PDP). Thanks.

Best wishes, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
> Local Time: July 14, 2017 8:15 PM
> UTC Time: July 14, 2017 7:15 PM
> From: wendy at seltzer.com
> To: Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>, ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
> On 07/13/2017 10:19 AM, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As a part of the Next Generation Registration Directory Service to Replace WHOIS Policy Development Process Working Group (RDS PDP WG), members have been asked to respond to a lengthy 40-question poll and to provide thoughtful rationale for and against potential data elements which go beyond those included in the tentative minimum public data set.
>>
>> Here is a link to a handout that was recently circulated which contains information about each of the proposed data elements: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086729/28JunePoll-DataElements-ExpandedHandout.pdf
>>
>> The deadline for responding to this poll in our personal capacity is this Saturday, 15 July. The poll results will be used to inform deliberation during our WG call on 18 July.
>>
>> I suggested on our PC call earlier this week that we should coordinate our response here and, as best we can, present a united front on which data elements we support and which we do not. Of course this is only a suggested path forward and WG members are free to respond to the poll as they wish. But if you would like to join me in developing a common position, I have created a Google Doc for us to use and encourage all RDS PDP WG members to help craft our position.
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharing
>> I warmly welcome your input ? please log into your Google account before responding (or add your name to the end of your comment) in case clarification is required. Thank you.
> Hi Ayden,
> Is this meant to be responsive to the group"s request for "user stories"
> and the data elements they require?
> --Wendy
>> Best wishes,
>> Ayden F?rdeline
>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](https://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
> --
> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
> Strategy Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
> Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
> https://wendy.seltzer.org/
> https://www.lumendatabase.org/
> https://www.torproject.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170714/bd1fff03/attachment.htm>

From wendy at seltzer.com  Fri Jul 14 22:20:19 2017
From: wendy at seltzer.com (Wendy Seltzer)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:20:19 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
In-Reply-To: <QgLJhC-oN_l-XcNCnk812cXMYKGHJOAlnFyOFEYc4I98L03TafdBOLsEwI9RAIVY1CUFOvOUgJXVkeV6M-AJvUQeD-eNzJ9txmzwgr39vn4=@ferdeline.com>
References: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>
 <377e5d3b-8a6a-a2cb-05e3-3938c3dc7f7d@seltzer.com>
 <QgLJhC-oN_l-XcNCnk812cXMYKGHJOAlnFyOFEYc4I98L03TafdBOLsEwI9RAIVY1CUFOvOUgJXVkeV6M-AJvUQeD-eNzJ9txmzwgr39vn4=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <5383b01e-af0e-becb-956a-ddfaae9c44f0@seltzer.com>

Thanks, sorry for the confusion.

--Wendy

On 07/14/2017 03:18 PM, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
> Hi Wendy,
> 
> No, this is an activity unrelated to our work on GDPR compliance, and is intended to help us respond to a poll currently being circulated to members of the GSNO working group (RDS PDP). Thanks.
> 
> Best wishes, Ayden
> 
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
>> Local Time: July 14, 2017 8:15 PM
>> UTC Time: July 14, 2017 7:15 PM
>> From: wendy at seltzer.com
>> To: Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>, ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>> On 07/13/2017 10:19 AM, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> As a part of the Next Generation Registration Directory Service to Replace WHOIS Policy Development Process Working Group (RDS PDP WG), members have been asked to respond to a lengthy 40-question poll and to provide thoughtful rationale for and against potential data elements which go beyond those included in the tentative minimum public data set.
>>>
>>> Here is a link to a handout that was recently circulated which contains information about each of the proposed data elements: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086729/28JunePoll-DataElements-ExpandedHandout.pdf
>>>
>>> The deadline for responding to this poll in our personal capacity is this Saturday, 15 July. The poll results will be used to inform deliberation during our WG call on 18 July.
>>>
>>> I suggested on our PC call earlier this week that we should coordinate our response here and, as best we can, present a united front on which data elements we support and which we do not. Of course this is only a suggested path forward and WG members are free to respond to the poll as they wish. But if you would like to join me in developing a common position, I have created a Google Doc for us to use and encourage all RDS PDP WG members to help craft our position.
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharing
>>> I warmly welcome your input ? please log into your Google account before responding (or add your name to the end of your comment) in case clarification is required. Thank you.
>> Hi Ayden,
>> Is this meant to be responsive to the group"s request for "user stories"
>> and the data elements they require?
>> --Wendy
>>> Best wishes,
>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](https://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>> --
>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
>> Strategy Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>> Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
>> https://wendy.seltzer.org/
>> https://www.lumendatabase.org/
>> https://www.torproject.org/


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
Strategy Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
https://wendy.seltzer.org/
https://www.lumendatabase.org/
https://www.torproject.org/


From icann at ferdeline.com  Sat Jul 15 18:30:56 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 11:30:56 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: Public consultation on the evaluation and revision of
	the .eu top-level domain regulations
In-Reply-To: <AuflZFzRjfi4SPmox46XoY5lI_XBRnV-4HyOmqQ7-pPVRShBpzYIPjwKPLO6U-8TUQwsOIiLH6rtNuYNPjO38WiSDljSK-S5ht0LZvS3JYU=@ferdeline.com>
References: <AuflZFzRjfi4SPmox46XoY5lI_XBRnV-4HyOmqQ7-pPVRShBpzYIPjwKPLO6U-8TUQwsOIiLH6rtNuYNPjO38WiSDljSK-S5ht0LZvS3JYU=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <My1QGoeGzqSniMr4FeBJJePFGYtMO6pc7_-j5b2PcBbyK88bzDAkSzvu92TL2vgUzTlwlPr7Nwh1bBPkjqfPMBREYrFRNJFsj6g_kW1NyzM=@ferdeline.com>

Hi,
I sent the below message on 12 June but have not yet received any feedback from the PC. The consultation deadline is 4 August; is this something we should devote resources responding to as the NCSG? Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
Thanks, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Public consultation on the evaluation and revision of the .eu top-level domain regulations
> Local Time: June 12, 2017 6:17 PM
> UTC Time: June 12, 2017 5:17 PM
> From: icann at ferdeline.com
> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>, NCSG <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
> The European Commission has launched a public consultation on the .eu top-level domain. Is this something that the NCSG should be commenting on? I have pasted below what the EU has identified as its objectives for this consultation.
> https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-evaluation-and-revision-eu-top-level-domain-regulations_en
> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
> --
>
> The purpose of this consultation is to collect views on the performance of the Regulations that are governing the .eu top-level domain.
>
> The .eu domain is the country code top level domain (ccTLD) for the European Union. Initiated by the Commission, it was formally established by Regulation 733/2002 of 22 April 2002 (as amended). The EC Regulation 874/2004 set the rules for the registry and the .eu. The .eu TLD was delegated by ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) in 2005.
>
> The main aim of the .eu (and .?? in Cyrillic script - hereafter ?.eu?) is to contribute effectively to the Digital Single Market by encouraging and increasing secure and reliable e-commerce and build a strong digital identity for people and organisations in the European Union.
>
> The .eu TLD ranks among the largest top-level domains. It is operated by EURid, a Belgian not-for-profit organisation, upon appointment of the European Commission. Therefore EURid is the current .eu registry. The .eu domain names can be registered through a network of approximately 700 companies, called "accredited registrars".
>
> Over a decade after their entry into force, the .eu Regulations should be reviewed to take into account the developments and challenges of the current domain name industry and to become more flexible and future-proof. The Commission's 2017 Work Programme provides that the revision of the eu. Regulations fall under the Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT) and that it should be preceded by an evaluation to assess whether the current regulatory framework is fit-for-purpose.
>
> On the basis of the findings, the Commission will define policy options to be pursued with the review the .eu Regulations. Examples of areas for which future options may be developed are:
>
> - facilitate operational management (e.g. the introduction of a much easier process for reserving .eu domain names for the European Institutions and Member/Candidate Countries);
> - update the Regulations in view of changed market circumstances. That might entail the introduction of a possibility for the .eu registry to sell directly to end-users in currently underserved markets where end-users have difficulties in finding a local domain name provider;
> - ensure the rules are future-proof, and allow the .eu TLD registry to introduce new services, if appropriate, that complement the management of the .eu TLD and its variants in other scripts (without having to amend the Regulations each time to do so);
> - promote EU priorities in Internet Governance, possibly by including provisions which would explicitly orient the .eu Registry's activities to that direction;
> - enhance the use of .eu as an online European identity. This might include among others consideration on changing the eligibility criteria for end-users.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170715/a9b78189/attachment.htm>

From matthew at intpolicy.com  Sun Jul 16 23:09:53 2017
From: matthew at intpolicy.com (Matthew Shears)
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 21:09:53 +0100
Subject: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
In-Reply-To: <QgLJhC-oN_l-XcNCnk812cXMYKGHJOAlnFyOFEYc4I98L03TafdBOLsEwI9RAIVY1CUFOvOUgJXVkeV6M-AJvUQeD-eNzJ9txmzwgr39vn4=@ferdeline.com>
References: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>
 <377e5d3b-8a6a-a2cb-05e3-3938c3dc7f7d@seltzer.com>
 <QgLJhC-oN_l-XcNCnk812cXMYKGHJOAlnFyOFEYc4I98L03TafdBOLsEwI9RAIVY1CUFOvOUgJXVkeV6M-AJvUQeD-eNzJ9txmzwgr39vn4=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <2c633f2b-5dae-1fdc-42ec-08450dbbd942@intpolicy.com>

I confess I am a little lost in this process.  The deadline is passed - 
can we seek an extension.


On 14/07/2017 20:18, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
> Hi Wendy,
>
> No, this is an activity unrelated to our work on GDPR compliance, and 
> is intended to help us respond to a poll currently being circulated to 
> members of the GSNO working group (RDS PDP). Thanks.
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
>> Local Time: July 14, 2017 8:15 PM
>> UTC Time: July 14, 2017 7:15 PM
>> From: wendy at seltzer.com
>> To: Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>, ncsg-pc 
>> <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>
>> On 07/13/2017 10:19 AM, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > As a part of the Next Generation Registration Directory Service to 
>> Replace WHOIS Policy Development Process Working Group (RDS PDP WG), 
>> members have been asked to respond to a lengthy 40-question poll and 
>> to provide thoughtful rationale for and against potential data 
>> elements which go beyond those included in the tentative minimum 
>> public data set.
>> >
>> > Here is a link to a handout that was recently circulated which 
>> contains information about each of the proposed data elements: 
>> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086729/28JunePoll-DataElements-ExpandedHandout.pdf
>> >
>> > The deadline for responding to this poll in our personal capacity 
>> is this Saturday, 15 July. The poll results will be used to inform 
>> deliberation during our WG call on 18 July.
>> >
>> > I suggested on our PC call earlier this week that we should 
>> coordinate our response here and, as best we can, present a united 
>> front on which data elements we support and which we do not. Of 
>> course this is only a suggested path forward and WG members are free 
>> to respond to the poll as they wish. But if you would like to join me 
>> in developing a common position, I have created a Google Doc for us 
>> to use and encourage all RDS PDP WG members to help craft our position.
>> > 
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharing
>> > I warmly welcome your input ? please log into your Google account 
>> before responding (or add your name to the end of your comment) in 
>> case clarification is required. Thank you.
>>
>> Hi Ayden,
>>
>> Is this meant to be responsive to the group"s request for "user stories"
>> and the data elements they require?
>>
>> --Wendy
>>
>> > Best wishes,
>> > Ayden F?rdeline
>> > [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](https://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > NCSG-PC mailing list
>> > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> >
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
>> Strategy Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>> Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
>> https://wendy.seltzer.org/
>> https://www.lumendatabase.org/
>> https://www.torproject.org/
>
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> 
> 	Virus-free. www.avg.com 
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> 
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

-- 
Matthew Shears
matthew at intpolicy.com
+447712472987
Skype:mshears

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170716/64030972/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Mon Jul 17 00:10:09 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 17:10:09 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
In-Reply-To: <2c633f2b-5dae-1fdc-42ec-08450dbbd942@intpolicy.com>
References: <YDm_8SbPAtdh-cuc3zyRb3XlbLS1x_zUoMg98atgt3YlkJD8UGC5_TSDp9WNEVckgmjOXjicGHHnls-3FE6vCLYixL2CW5FW-ZE5lJnGEwQ=@ferdeline.com>
 <377e5d3b-8a6a-a2cb-05e3-3938c3dc7f7d@seltzer.com>
 <QgLJhC-oN_l-XcNCnk812cXMYKGHJOAlnFyOFEYc4I98L03TafdBOLsEwI9RAIVY1CUFOvOUgJXVkeV6M-AJvUQeD-eNzJ9txmzwgr39vn4=@ferdeline.com>
 <2c633f2b-5dae-1fdc-42ec-08450dbbd942@intpolicy.com>
Message-ID: <3Hec3ckywUB1n1qaRCHK6qMXxlU0bY9EtQRsTuXoM039mFqN3icZarHB0QriuUb480dJ3TGHw_isfuucXDmwxbBorbOSLSdCnVug8jGRgiw=@ferdeline.com>

Unfortunately I do not think an extension would be granted. It was my perception that the very small response window for this poll was intentional. However, this was not a poll which required a formal NCSG response. The leadership team of the RDS PDP WG put out a 'wish list' of 39 data elements for a future RDS. The aim of this poll, as best I understand it, was to put something concrete on the table and to allow WG members to provide input on whether they agree or disagree with that data element. These polls are supposedly informal but their results seem (to me) to be treated as gospel by the WG. As a result, I was keen to see a number of NCSG members respond to the poll in their personal capacity with public interest-orientated responses, and from what I understand, that has happened. I hope this sheds a bit more light on my original email to this list.

- Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
> Local Time: July 16, 2017 9:09 PM
> UTC Time: July 16, 2017 8:09 PM
> From: matthew at intpolicy.com
> To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>
> I confess I am a little lost in this process. The deadline is passed - can we seek an extension.
>
> On 14/07/2017 20:18, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>
>> Hi Wendy,
>> No, this is an activity unrelated to our work on GDPR compliance, and is intended to help us respond to a poll currently being circulated to members of the GSNO working group (RDS PDP). Thanks.
>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] RDS PDP WG Poll - Response Coordination
>>> Local Time: July 14, 2017 8:15 PM
>>> UTC Time: July 14, 2017 7:15 PM
>>> From: wendy at seltzer.com
>>> To: Ayden F?rdeline [<icann at ferdeline.com>](mailto:icann at ferdeline.com), ncsg-pc [<ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>](mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is)
>>> On 07/13/2017 10:19 AM, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> As a part of the Next Generation Registration Directory Service to Replace WHOIS Policy Development Process Working Group (RDS PDP WG), members have been asked to respond to a lengthy 40-question poll and to provide thoughtful rationale for and against potential data elements which go beyond those included in the tentative minimum public data set.
>>>>
>>>> Here is a link to a handout that was recently circulated which contains information about each of the proposed data elements: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086729/28JunePoll-DataElements-ExpandedHandout.pdf
>>>>
>>>> The deadline for responding to this poll in our personal capacity is this Saturday, 15 July. The poll results will be used to inform deliberation during our WG call on 18 July.
>>>>
>>>> I suggested on our PC call earlier this week that we should coordinate our response here and, as best we can, present a united front on which data elements we support and which we do not. Of course this is only a suggested path forward and WG members are free to respond to the poll as they wish. But if you would like to join me in developing a common position, I have created a Google Doc for us to use and encourage all RDS PDP WG members to help craft our position.
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharinghttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1tsGTBf5P5dqDzdgGwVrYxHJQF9aKo7DQU55Tm4q9H_M/edit?usp=sharing
>>>> I warmly welcome your input ? please log into your Google account before responding (or add your name to the end of your comment) in case clarification is required. Thank you.
>>> Hi Ayden,
>>> Is this meant to be responsive to the group"s request for "user stories"
>>> and the data elements they require?
>>> --Wendy
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>> [linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](https://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
>>> Strategy Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>>> Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
>>> https://wendy.seltzer.org/
>>> https://www.lumendatabase.org/
>>> https://www.torproject.org/
>>
>> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient	Virus-free. [www.avg.com](http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient)
>> #DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
> --
> Matthew Shears
> matthew at intpolicy.com
> +447712472987
> Skype:mshears
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170716/ad35fbb9/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Tue Jul 25 07:35:34 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 13:35:34 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of
	the GAC Communique
In-Reply-To: <CADWyk6z+ZQdh8-GU7SN_w0DGb_ah2uMkroHnTg7k+rG=Uokpkw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADWyk6z+ZQdh8-GU7SN_w0DGb_ah2uMkroHnTg7k+rG=Uokpkw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThmd-n3Xp7z3eFroZhGgyvH_h8heS327hi+EhffVMArrLg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

with regard to GNSO response the GAC communique, we got the latest draft
and with 2 options about geonames. since it concerns the work of subsequent
procedures WG, I would like to hear from Avri about her thoughts on
the proposed wordings.
we should discuss which option we are fine and review the letter.
the electronic vote will happen next week.

Best,

Rafik

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com>
Date: 2017-07-24 21:53 GMT+09:00
Subject: [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the GAC
Communique
To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org


Dear Council colleagues,

We have reached a point of near finalization of the GNSO Response to the
GAC Johannesburg Communique. The one outstanding item amongst the members
of the revision team is the text relating to geographic names. You'll see
this text in the attached draft as Option A and Option B.

For our input to reach the Board in time for its meeting with the GAC in
the week of 14 August, we cannot push this out to the next Council meeting
in late August. For our response to be timely and effective, we need a
Communique Response that we can agree on in full before it goes to
electronic vote.

We had scheduled an electronic Council vote to open this Thursday, but we
don't yet have a final text to vote on. Hence I propose we delay the
electronic vote to open next Monday to give us all time to consider and
take instructions (if appropriate) on Option A and B.

To help us get to final, votable text, please could you review the attached
and complete the Doodle to express support for either Option A or B on geo
names.

*Doodle:* https://icannorg.doodle.com/poll/yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t

*Timeline*:

   - Monday, 24 July: Doodle (to select Option A or B on geo names text)
   opens
   - Friday, 28 July: Doodle closes
   - Monday, 31 July: Electronic vote on Council motion approving the GNSO
   Response to GAC Joburg Communique (including preferred Option A or B) opens
   - Friday, 4 August: Electronic vote closes
   - Monday, 7 August: GNSO Response to GAC Communique transmitted to Board


Many thanks to Marika and the Secretariat team for helping to coordinate
both the Doodle and e-vote in such a tight timeframe. Also noting that
James and Donna are both away today, so I'm on point to shepherd this
through.

Best wishes to all,

Heather

_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170725/91d1eb5d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: GNSO Council Review of GAC Communique - JNB - 24 July 2017.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 27849 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170725/91d1eb5d/attachment.docx>

From matthew at intpolicy.com  Tue Jul 25 12:05:27 2017
From: matthew at intpolicy.com (Matthew Shears)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 16:05:27 +0700
Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Comment on GNSO operating procedures change
In-Reply-To: <93940f3e-485d-2678-4f92-a9d85981d313@intpolicy.com>
References: <93940f3e-485d-2678-4f92-a9d85981d313@intpolicy.com>
Message-ID: <aeac9647-4b76-a3bc-f199-a862597eb1c2@intpolicy.com>

Calling all PCers

I have started on the above public comment but am still going through 
the consultation docs.  However, time marches on and we need to get this 
one underway.

So, please review the consultation docs here:

https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2017-06-19-en

And make comments in the google doc here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gydCJ3IFGsptk8BTYa8aQ5lF-ddk_Q9DWja7bZIgsiY/edit 
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gydCJ3IFGsptk8BTYa8aQ5lF-ddk_Q9DWja7bZIgsiY/edit>

Note that ICANN staff have used this opportunity to include other 
changes that the DT did not discuss.

Many thanks.

Matthew


-- 
Matthew Shears
matthew at intpolicy.com
+447712472987
Skype:mshears

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170725/a3b9691f/attachment.htm>

From matthew at intpolicy.com  Tue Jul 25 17:17:22 2017
From: matthew at intpolicy.com (Matthew Shears)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 21:17:22 +0700
Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Comment on GNSO operating procedures change
In-Reply-To: <aeac9647-4b76-a3bc-f199-a862597eb1c2@intpolicy.com>
References: <93940f3e-485d-2678-4f92-a9d85981d313@intpolicy.com>
 <aeac9647-4b76-a3bc-f199-a862597eb1c2@intpolicy.com>
Message-ID: <30c249d1-c479-003c-0a82-997037d7456a@intpolicy.com>

Let me qualify the last sentence - ICANN staff are not adding new items 
in addition to the work of the DT, but rather adding references to work 
done previously.


On 25/07/2017 16:05, Matthew Shears wrote:
> Calling all PCers
>
> I have started on the above public comment but am still going through 
> the consultation docs.  However, time marches on and we need to get 
> this one underway.
>
> So, please review the consultation docs here:
>
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2017-06-19-en
>
> And make comments in the google doc here:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gydCJ3IFGsptk8BTYa8aQ5lF-ddk_Q9DWja7bZIgsiY/edit 
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gydCJ3IFGsptk8BTYa8aQ5lF-ddk_Q9DWja7bZIgsiY/edit>
>
> Note that ICANN staff have used this opportunity to include other 
> changes that the DT did not discuss.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Matthew
>
>
> -- 
> Matthew Shears
> matthew at intpolicy.com
> +447712472987
> Skype:mshears

-- 
Matthew Shears
matthew at intpolicy.com
+447712472987
Skype:mshears

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170725/aaf55a04/attachment.htm>

From stefania.milan at eui.eu  Tue Jul 25 17:28:39 2017
From: stefania.milan at eui.eu (Stefania Milan)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 09:28:39 -0500
Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Comment on GNSO operating procedures change
In-Reply-To: <30c249d1-c479-003c-0a82-997037d7456a@intpolicy.com>
References: <93940f3e-485d-2678-4f92-a9d85981d313@intpolicy.com>
 <aeac9647-4b76-a3bc-f199-a862597eb1c2@intpolicy.com>
 <30c249d1-c479-003c-0a82-997037d7456a@intpolicy.com>
Message-ID: <8A6BC6C5-CA17-4CB3-8231-00A39DBD2287@eui.eu>

Hi Matt, thanks. What's the deadline for this? I am in transit (and in fact, on holiday), witch sketchy internet access and the doc doesn't open for me today (might be the poor connection...)

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 25, 2017, at 9:17 AM, Matthew Shears <matthew at intpolicy.com<mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>> wrote:


Let me qualify the last sentence - ICANN staff are not adding new items in addition to the work of the DT, but rather adding references to work done previously.

On 25/07/2017 16:05, Matthew Shears wrote:
Calling all PCers

I have started on the above public comment but am still going through the consultation docs.  However, time marches on and we need to get this one underway.

So, please review the consultation docs here:

https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2017-06-19-en

And make comments in the google doc here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gydCJ3IFGsptk8BTYa8aQ5lF-ddk_Q9DWja7bZIgsiY/edit

Note that ICANN staff have used this opportunity to include other changes that the DT did not discuss.

Many thanks.

Matthew



--
Matthew Shears
matthew at intpolicy.com<mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>
+447712472987
Skype:mshears


--
Matthew Shears
matthew at intpolicy.com<mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>
+447712472987
Skype:mshears

_______________________________________________
NCSG-PC mailing list
NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is<mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170725/6d34e527/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Wed Jul 26 02:22:49 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 08:22:49 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Comment on GNSO operating procedures change
In-Reply-To: <8A6BC6C5-CA17-4CB3-8231-00A39DBD2287@eui.eu>
References: <93940f3e-485d-2678-4f92-a9d85981d313@intpolicy.com>
 <aeac9647-4b76-a3bc-f199-a862597eb1c2@intpolicy.com>
 <30c249d1-c479-003c-0a82-997037d7456a@intpolicy.com>
 <8A6BC6C5-CA17-4CB3-8231-00A39DBD2287@eui.eu>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThk7c-Oyj+v1Qh_=0gH5a_nN=o2yOvyrymueOxwQW7X9aA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

the deadline for the public comment is the 10th of August, we have to
finish consulting with NCSG members, review and endorsement prior to that.
I suggest 8th August as our internal deadline.

Best,

Rafik

2017-07-25 23:28 GMT+09:00 Stefania Milan <stefania.milan at eui.eu>:

> Hi Matt, thanks. What's the deadline for this? I am in transit (and in
> fact, on holiday), witch sketchy internet access and the doc doesn't open
> for me today (might be the poor connection...)
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 25, 2017, at 9:17 AM, Matthew Shears <matthew at intpolicy.com> wrote:
>
> Let me qualify the last sentence - ICANN staff are not adding new items in
> addition to the work of the DT, but rather adding references to work done
> previously.
>
> On 25/07/2017 16:05, Matthew Shears wrote:
>
> Calling all PCers
>
> I have started on the above public comment but am still going through the
> consultation docs.  However, time marches on and we need to get this one
> underway.
>
> So, please review the consultation docs here:
>
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2017-06-19-en
>
> And make comments in the google doc here:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gydCJ3IFGsptk8BTYa8aQ5lF
> -ddk_Q9DWja7bZIgsiY/edit
> Note that ICANN staff have used this opportunity to include other changes
> that the DT did not discuss.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Matthew
>
>
> --
> Matthew Shearsmatthew at intpolicy.com+447712472987 <+44%207712%20472987>Skype:mshears
>
>
> --
> Matthew Shearsmatthew at intpolicy.com+447712472987 <+44%207712%20472987>Skype:mshears
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
>
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution,
> forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this
> information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is
> prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received
> this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material from any computer.
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170726/2c0fba9e/attachment.htm>

From mpsilvavalent at gmail.com  Thu Jul 27 05:08:20 2017
From: mpsilvavalent at gmail.com (Martin Pablo Silva Valent)
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 23:08:20 -0300
Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Comment on GNSO operating procedures change
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThk7c-Oyj+v1Qh_=0gH5a_nN=o2yOvyrymueOxwQW7X9aA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <93940f3e-485d-2678-4f92-a9d85981d313@intpolicy.com>
 <aeac9647-4b76-a3bc-f199-a862597eb1c2@intpolicy.com>
 <30c249d1-c479-003c-0a82-997037d7456a@intpolicy.com>
 <8A6BC6C5-CA17-4CB3-8231-00A39DBD2287@eui.eu>
 <CAH5sThk7c-Oyj+v1Qh_=0gH5a_nN=o2yOvyrymueOxwQW7X9aA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9A97DC8E-D4E8-4110-8AE0-4AD57BCE8E4B@gmail.com>

Matt,
	I don?t have any comment to do, I agree with the statements and the wording. Let me know if I can do anything specific to help. Other than that you have my support. Thanks!

Cheers,
Mart?n

> On Jul 25, 2017, at 8:22 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> the deadline for the public comment is the 10th of August, we have to finish consulting with NCSG members, review and endorsement prior to that. I suggest 8th August as our internal deadline.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> 2017-07-25 23:28 GMT+09:00 Stefania Milan <stefania.milan at eui.eu <mailto:stefania.milan at eui.eu>>:
> Hi Matt, thanks. What's the deadline for this? I am in transit (and in fact, on holiday), witch sketchy internet access and the doc doesn't open for me today (might be the poor connection...)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Jul 25, 2017, at 9:17 AM, Matthew Shears <matthew at intpolicy.com <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>> wrote:
> 
>> Let me qualify the last sentence - ICANN staff are not adding new items in addition to the work of the DT, but rather adding references to work done previously.
>> 
>> 
>> On 25/07/2017 16:05, Matthew Shears wrote:
>>> Calling all PCers
>>> I have started on the above public comment but am still going through the consultation docs.  However, time marches on and we need to get this one underway.  
>>> So, please review the consultation docs here:
>>> 
>>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2017-06-19-en <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2017-06-19-en>
>>> And make comments in the google doc here:
>>> 
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gydCJ3IFGsptk8BTYa8aQ5lF-ddk_Q9DWja7bZIgsiY/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gydCJ3IFGsptk8BTYa8aQ5lF-ddk_Q9DWja7bZIgsiY/edit>Note that ICANN staff have used this opportunity to include other changes that the DT did not discuss.
>>> 
>>> Many thanks.
>>> 
>>> Matthew
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Matthew Shears
>>> matthew at intpolicy.com <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>
>>> +447712472987 <tel:+44%207712%20472987>
>>> Skype:mshears <>
>> -- 
>> Matthew Shears
>> matthew at intpolicy.com <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>
>> +447712472987 <tel:+44%207712%20472987>
>> Skype:mshears <>_______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>  
> 
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170726/95ef6536/attachment.htm>

From ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info  Thu Jul 27 23:24:12 2017
From: ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 23:24:12 +0300
Subject: [NCSG-PC] GNSO Council Vice Chair (NCPH) Election Process;
 GNSO Board Seat (NCPH) Election Process
Message-ID: <20170727202412.6gqn64chctj56jyj@roller.tarvainen.info>

Dear PC members,

As GNSO Chair election comes near, you might wish to review
the Vice Chair election procedure we agreed with CSG on last year.
For reference, I'll attach it below (can't seem to find it
online anywhere).

------------------------------------------------------------------

NON-CONTRACTED PARTIES HOUSE PROCESS FOR SELECTING GNSO COUNCIL VICE
CHAIR

(Effective November 7, 2016)

Vice Chairs wouldwill serve one-year terms. 

The first-term Vice Chair wouldwill presumptively serve a second
one-year term, but wouldwill be subject to review and consent by the
other Stakeholder Group (SG) after the first term. 

Review and consent by the other SG after the first term could result in
a rejection of the sitting Vice Chair, but there would need to be
extraordinary reasons for this rejection. 

If a Vice Chair does not serve a second term (whether by rejection or
for any other reason), that Vice Chair's SG wouldwill nominate a
candidate for the upcoming term, but that Vice Chair wouldwill
presumptively serve only one one-year term. The new candidate wouldwill
be subject to review and approval by the other SG. 

After two years with one SG, the Vice Chair-ship wouldwill be offered as
a first nomination to the "?non-incumbent"? SG. 

The "?non-incumbent"? SG wouldwill nominate a candidate for review
and approval by the first SG, through a "?listening tour"? process. 

While there wouldwill be a presumption in favor of the candidate of the
"?non-incumbent"? SG, both SGs have to approve the candidate. 

If approval is not achieved, the "?non-incumbent"? SG wouldwill
nominate another candidate, up to two additional times if necessary. 

If approval is not achieved even after two re-nominations, the NCA
shallNominating Committee Appointed Councilor (NCA) assigned to the
Non-Contracted Parties House (NCPH) will attempt to mediate and find a
compromise candidate that both SGs would find acceptable. 

In case If a member of either SG member becomes the Chair of the GNSO,
the other SG would get towill select the Vice Chair. It through the
process set forth above. This would not affect the rotation after the
Chair passes on to the CPHContracted Parties House again,; the
presumptive Vice Chair turn wouldwill go to whichever SG didwas due to
hold the seat next according to the process set forth above, as if the
NCPH member had not hold Viceserved as Chair before. .

If the SGs agree to nominate the NCA as Vice Chair, the presumptive
rotation would continue after her or histhe NCA?s term as if it hadn't
happened.he or she had not served as Vice-Chair. 

If no agreement is reached in time for a councilCouncil meeting, there
will be no NCPH Vice Chair infor that meeting.


Vice Chairs would serve one-year terms. 

The first-term Vice Chair would presumptively serve a second one-year
term, but would be subject to review and consent by the other SG after
the first term. 

Review and consent by the other SG after the first term could result in
a rejection of the sitting Vice Chair, but there would need to be
extraordinary reasons for this rejection. 

If a Vice Chair does not serve a second term (whether by rejection or
for any other reason), that Vice Chair's SG would nominate a candidate
for the upcoming term, but that Vice Chair would presumptively serve
only one one-year term. The new candidate would be subject to review and
approval by the other SG. 

After two years with one SG, the Vice Chair-ship would be offered as a
first nomination to the "non-incumbent" SG. 

The "non-incumbent" SG would nominate a candidate for review and
approval by the first SG, through a "listening tour" process. 

While there would be a presumption in favor of the candidate of the
"non-incumbent" SG, both SGs have to approve the candidate. 

If approval is not achieved, the "non-incumbent" SG would nominate
another candidate, up to two additional times if necessary. 

If approval is not achieved even after two re-nominations, the NCA shall
attempt to mediate and find a compromise candidate that both SGs would
find acceptable. 

In case either SG member becomes the Chair of GNSO, the other SG would
get to select Vice Chair. It would not affect rotation after the Chair
passes on to the CPH again, presumptive Vice Chair turn would go to
whichever SG did not hold Vice Chair before. 

If SGs agree to nominate the NCA as Vice Chair the presumptive rotation
would continue after her or his term as if it hadn't happened. 

If no agreement is reached in time for a council meeting, there will be
no NCPH Vice Chair in that meeting.

------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen


From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca  Thu Jul 27 23:37:56 2017
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:37:56 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
Message-ID: <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>

Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just 
forwarding....

Stephanie



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional 
& GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
Date: 	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
From: 	Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>
To: 	Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Susan Kawaguchi 
<susankpolicy at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, 
icannlists <icannlists at winston.com>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben 
<wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>, Anthony Harris 
<anthonyrharris at gmail.com>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, 
Milan, Stefania <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>, Marilia Maciel 
<mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Stephanie Perrin 
<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Martin Pablo Silva Valent 
<mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com>
CC: 	Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org>



Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony, 
Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,

I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with 
the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two 
face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 
day strategic planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot 
project for FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional 
meeting.

As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had 
indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH 
Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, 
staff would like to know if you believe it will be _preferable for these 
two meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can 
occur within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you 
think it will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking 
place at different times in the year_.

You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face 
meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting 
requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several 
months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, 
the budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference 
for Los Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently 
in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH 
Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.

We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar 
year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. 
In addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH 
Intersessional is the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the 
GNSO Council. However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate 
to seek as much input as possible from those community members who may 
be most affected by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to 
provide us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.

Thanks and cheers

Mary

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170727/c910ef9d/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Fri Jul 28 02:23:20 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:23:20 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] GNSO Council Vice Chair (NCPH) Election Process;
 GNSO Board Seat (NCPH) Election Process
In-Reply-To: <20170727202412.6gqn64chctj56jyj@roller.tarvainen.info>
References: <20170727202412.6gqn64chctj56jyj@roller.tarvainen.info>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThn9huqtwuTag5aASFX7bKeZ804bh1_jf4d+M9QC_8hNXQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Tapani,

I shared previously the timeline for the chair election and asking for
comments from PC. our decision on that (nomination first and then voting
)will influence our selection of vice-chair.
I am happy to reach CSG side to kick-off the discussion.

Best,

Rafik

2017-07-28 5:24 GMT+09:00 Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info>:

> Dear PC members,
>
> As GNSO Chair election comes near, you might wish to review
> the Vice Chair election procedure we agreed with CSG on last year.
> For reference, I'll attach it below (can't seem to find it
> online anywhere).
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> NON-CONTRACTED PARTIES HOUSE PROCESS FOR SELECTING GNSO COUNCIL VICE
> CHAIR
>
> (Effective November 7, 2016)
>
> Vice Chairs wouldwill serve one-year terms.
>
> The first-term Vice Chair wouldwill presumptively serve a second
> one-year term, but wouldwill be subject to review and consent by the
> other Stakeholder Group (SG) after the first term.
>
> Review and consent by the other SG after the first term could result in
> a rejection of the sitting Vice Chair, but there would need to be
> extraordinary reasons for this rejection.
>
> If a Vice Chair does not serve a second term (whether by rejection or
> for any other reason), that Vice Chair's SG wouldwill nominate a
> candidate for the upcoming term, but that Vice Chair wouldwill
> presumptively serve only one one-year term. The new candidate wouldwill
> be subject to review and approval by the other SG.
>
> After two years with one SG, the Vice Chair-ship wouldwill be offered as
> a first nomination to the "?non-incumbent"? SG.
>
> The "?non-incumbent"? SG wouldwill nominate a candidate for review
> and approval by the first SG, through a "?listening tour"? process.
>
> While there wouldwill be a presumption in favor of the candidate of the
> "?non-incumbent"? SG, both SGs have to approve the candidate.
>
> If approval is not achieved, the "?non-incumbent"? SG wouldwill
> nominate another candidate, up to two additional times if necessary.
>
> If approval is not achieved even after two re-nominations, the NCA
> shallNominating Committee Appointed Councilor (NCA) assigned to the
> Non-Contracted Parties House (NCPH) will attempt to mediate and find a
> compromise candidate that both SGs would find acceptable.
>
> In case If a member of either SG member becomes the Chair of the GNSO,
> the other SG would get towill select the Vice Chair. It through the
> process set forth above. This would not affect the rotation after the
> Chair passes on to the CPHContracted Parties House again,; the
> presumptive Vice Chair turn wouldwill go to whichever SG didwas due to
> hold the seat next according to the process set forth above, as if the
> NCPH member had not hold Viceserved as Chair before. .
>
> If the SGs agree to nominate the NCA as Vice Chair, the presumptive
> rotation would continue after her or histhe NCA?s term as if it hadn't
> happened.he or she had not served as Vice-Chair.
>
> If no agreement is reached in time for a councilCouncil meeting, there
> will be no NCPH Vice Chair infor that meeting.
>
>
> Vice Chairs would serve one-year terms.
>
> The first-term Vice Chair would presumptively serve a second one-year
> term, but would be subject to review and consent by the other SG after
> the first term.
>
> Review and consent by the other SG after the first term could result in
> a rejection of the sitting Vice Chair, but there would need to be
> extraordinary reasons for this rejection.
>
> If a Vice Chair does not serve a second term (whether by rejection or
> for any other reason), that Vice Chair's SG would nominate a candidate
> for the upcoming term, but that Vice Chair would presumptively serve
> only one one-year term. The new candidate would be subject to review and
> approval by the other SG.
>
> After two years with one SG, the Vice Chair-ship would be offered as a
> first nomination to the "non-incumbent" SG.
>
> The "non-incumbent" SG would nominate a candidate for review and
> approval by the first SG, through a "listening tour" process.
>
> While there would be a presumption in favor of the candidate of the
> "non-incumbent" SG, both SGs have to approve the candidate.
>
> If approval is not achieved, the "non-incumbent" SG would nominate
> another candidate, up to two additional times if necessary.
>
> If approval is not achieved even after two re-nominations, the NCA shall
> attempt to mediate and find a compromise candidate that both SGs would
> find acceptable.
>
> In case either SG member becomes the Chair of GNSO, the other SG would
> get to select Vice Chair. It would not affect rotation after the Chair
> passes on to the CPH again, presumptive Vice Chair turn would go to
> whichever SG did not hold Vice Chair before.
>
> If SGs agree to nominate the NCA as Vice Chair the presumptive rotation
> would continue after her or his term as if it hadn't happened.
>
> If no agreement is reached in time for a council meeting, there will be
> no NCPH Vice Chair in that meeting.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170728/6ce0611a/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Fri Jul 28 03:28:15 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 09:28:15 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of
	the GAC Communique
Message-ID: <CAH5sThnUYCVT-CQT=n2PnzRUkZfSSd49cYXN8SH9cnP0yfzCzg@mail.gmail.com>

hi all,

the discussion about the text for geonames in GNSO response is ongoing. we
should agree on what can be acceptable for NCSG.
@Avri any thought on this? is the new text helpful for the subsequent
procedures WG?

Best,

Rafik

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Austin, Donna via council <council at gnso.icann.org>
Date: 2017-07-28 0:11 GMT+09:00
Subject: Re: [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the GAC
Communique
To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <
council at gnso.icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>, Jeff Neuman <
jeff.neuman at valideus.com>


Heather, All



During an RySG call yesterday there was considerable discussion about the
merits of each of the proposed options relating to the geographic names.



I understand (and sincerely apologise) this request is late in the day;
however, the RySG has requested that consideration be given to a potential
third option that would serve to replace both Option A and Option B. As you
will see, this third option contains the main elements of both Option A and
B, and also addresses the comment from Paul McGrady that the response call
out the community discussions in Johannesburg:



*The GNSO Council also takes note of the ?Geographic Names as Top-Level
Domains? section of the communiqu? restating previous advice and positions.
Among those positions are references that imply that certain geographic
top-level domains should be addressed by, and only through, a ccNSO PDP.
With respect to that position we note that rather than initiative a ccNSO
PDP on country and territory names at the top-level, the ccNSO established
a Cross Community Working Group on the Use of Country and Territory Names
(CCWG UCTN) that was jointly chartered by the ccNSO and GNSO. The CCWG UCTN
recently produced a final report, but was unable to provide recommendations
on the use of country and territory names as TLDs, beyond the use of
two-characters. The GNSO strongly believes that these issues are currently
within the scope and charter of the GNSO Policy Development Process on New
gTLD Subsequent Procedures (SubPro PDP). As a result of the recent Cross
Community Discussions on geographic names conducted at ICANN 59, the SubPro
PDP is establishing a new Work Track 5 on Geographic Names at the Top Level
and inviting representatives from each of the SOs and ACs to form a
Leadership Team for that Work Track. The GNSO Council encourages
participation from the community, including the GAC, in that SubPro PDP to
ensure a multi-stakeholder bottom up solution to this issue.*



*This approach is consistent with the GAC?s position also contained in the
?Geographic Names as Top-Level Domains? section of the communiqu? ? ? that
any further process of policy review and development should: (a) continue
to allow all stakeholder groups to participate equally; (b) take into
account the history and rationale of the arrangements currently in place;
and (c) apply an evidence-based policy approach to any proposals for future
arrangements.?*



As Rubens has already noted on the Council list, the respective authors of
Options A and B both recognize potential shortcomings of their suggested
text and to that end both Rubens and Jeff both support the proposed
amendment.

Thank you for considering this late amendment, which serves to replace both
Option A and Option B.



Donna



*From:* council-bounces at gnso.icann.org [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.
icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Heather Forrest
*Sent:* Monday, July 24, 2017 5:54 AM
*To:* GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
*Cc:* gnso-secs at icann.org
*Subject:* [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the GAC
Communique



Dear Council colleagues,



We have reached a point of near finalization of the GNSO Response to the
GAC Johannesburg Communique. The one outstanding item amongst the members
of the revision team is the text relating to geographic names. You'll see
this text in the attached draft as Option A and Option B.



For our input to reach the Board in time for its meeting with the GAC in
the week of 14 August, we cannot push this out to the next Council meeting
in late August. For our response to be timely and effective, we need a
Communique Response that we can agree on in full before it goes to
electronic vote.



We had scheduled an electronic Council vote to open this Thursday, but we
don't yet have a final text to vote on. Hence I propose we delay the
electronic vote to open next Monday to give us all time to consider and
take instructions (if appropriate) on Option A and B.



To help us get to final, votable text, please could you review the attached
and complete the Doodle to express support for either Option A or B on geo
names.


*Doodle:* https://icannorg.doodle.com/poll/yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icannorg.doodle.com_poll_yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=YCVgcMubkaHFRHLFtfeKImXTW8Nipr07HJGcexh2XrE&s=kIS8BXv4sOul3g4opzWC6lqtvhe6Vhm1XpK9VFYJwZM&e=>



*Timeline*:

? Monday, 24 July: Doodle (to select Option A or B on geo names text) opens

? Friday, 28 July: Doodle closes

? Monday, 31 July: Electronic vote on Council motion approving the GNSO
Response to GAC Joburg Communique (including preferred Option A or B) opens

? Friday, 4 August: Electronic vote closes

? Monday, 7 August: GNSO Response to GAC Communique transmitted to Board



Many thanks to Marika and the Secretariat team for helping to coordinate
both the Doodle and e-vote in such a tight timeframe. Also noting that
James and Donna are both away today, so I'm on point to shepherd this
through.



Best wishes to all,



Heather

_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170728/507598b9/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Fri Jul 28 13:57:18 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 06:57:18 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
	Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>

Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
I think the two meetings should be held separately at different times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to different audiences [with some overlap].
I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN office for the majority of the likely participants.
For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair]. It would also be a rather economical choice.

Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
> Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
> UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>
> Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just forwarding....
>
> Stephanie
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
> Date:	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
> From:	Mary Wong [<mary.wong at icann.org>](mailto:mary.wong at icann.org)
> To:	Phil Corwin [<psc at vlaw-dc.com>](mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com), Susan Kawaguchi [<susankpolicy at gmail.com>](mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com), Heather Forrest [<haforrestesq at gmail.com>](mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com), icannlists [<icannlists at winston.com>](mailto:icannlists at winston.com), Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben [<wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>](mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de), Anthony Harris [<anthonyrharris at gmail.com>](mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com), Rafik Dammak [<rafik.dammak at gmail.com>](mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com), Milan, Stefania [<Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>](mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu), Marilia Maciel [<mariliamaciel at gmail.com>](mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com), Stephanie Perrin [<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>](mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca), Martin Pablo Silva Valent [<mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>](mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com), Johan Helsingius [<julf at julf.com>](mailto:julf at julf.com)
> CC:	Benedetta Rossi [<benedetta.rossi at icann.org>](mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org)
>
> Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>
> I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>
> As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, staff would like to know if you believe it will be preferable for these two meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at different times in the year.
>
> You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>
> We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as possible from those community members who may be most affected by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
>
> Thanks and cheers
>
> Mary
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170728/aadf9e61/attachment.htm>

From pileleji at ymca.gm  Fri Jul 28 14:22:40 2017
From: pileleji at ymca.gm (Poncelet Ileleji)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 12:22:40 +0100
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAEux40tnEw_0T8YRfj6k+EvJnQrcScXQfy+BXH4P2NXuH5fPRQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Ayden,

Much appreciated in response to Stephanie email, I totally concur with
majority of your comments. However  for the intersessional, Cost in terms
of  travel and easier access I suggest we stick to Iceland as the last one
showed, it ticked all the boxes.  So for me the way Iceland has made their
destination very flexible and appealing as a transit hub to Europe, North
America and others, makes it a good choice.  Flight cost and easy transit
from Europe makes it a perfect fit to me.  My 0.000001% addition.

Kind Regards

Poncelet



On 28 July 2017 at 11:57, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:

> Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>
> I think the two meetings should be held separately at different times of
> the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to different audiences
> [with some overlap].
>
> I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business hours,
> but some of our participants might find it easier to be able to travel to a
> meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting commence on a Sunday. I am
> not sure what others think about this suggestion, particularly those on the
> GNSO Council who would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out
> there...
>
> For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to me to
> have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN office for the
> majority of the likely participants.
>
> For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I understand
> that is not a view held by all) I also think Los Angeles makes a lot of
> sense, though I understand the participant profiles vary, and it may be
> very difficult for many of the Intersessional participants to travel to the
> United States. Based on the participant profiles of everyone who attended
> the Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much easier
> for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or Canadian visa does
> not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many in Latin America, Mexico?s
> immigration policies are very fair]. It would also be a rather economical
> choice.
>
> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
> Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
> Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
> UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>
>
> Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just
> forwarding....
>
> Stephanie
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:
> YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO
> Council strategic planning sessions
> Date:
> Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
> From:
> Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> <mary.wong at icann.org>
> To:
> Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> <psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Susan Kawaguchi
> <susankpolicy at gmail.com> <susankpolicy at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest
> <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, icannlists
> <icannlists at winston.com> <icannlists at winston.com>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
> <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de> <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>,
> Anthony Harris <anthonyrharris at gmail.com> <anthonyrharris at gmail.com>,
> Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, Milan,
> Stefania <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu> <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>, Marilia Maciel
> <mariliamaciel at gmail.com> <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Stephanie Perrin
> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>,
> Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
> <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com>
> <julf at julf.com>
> CC:
> Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org> <benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>
>
> Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony,
> Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>
>
>
> I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with the
> GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two face-to-face
> meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic
> planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot project for
> FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>
>
>
> As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had
> indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH
> Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, staff
> would like to know if you believe it will be *preferable for these two
> meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur
> within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it
> will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at
> different times in the year*.
>
>
>
> You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face
> meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting
> requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several
> months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the
> budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los
> Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the
> same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH
> Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>
>
>
> We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar
> year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. In
> addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH Intersessional is
> the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council.
> However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much
> input as possible from those community members who may be most affected by
> the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us with your
> opinion as to which option is preferred.
>
>
>
> Thanks and cheers
>
> Mary
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>


-- 
Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
Coordinator
The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
MDI Road Kanifing South
P. O. Box 421 Banjul
The Gambia, West Africa
Tel: (220) 4370240
Fax:(220) 4390793
Cell:(220) 9912508
Skype: pons_utd






*www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm>http://jokkolabs.net/en/
<http://jokkolabs.net/en/>www.waigf.org
<http://www.waigf.org>www,insistglobal.com <http://www.itag.gm>www.npoc.org
<http://www.npoc.org>http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753
<http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753>*www.diplointernetgovernance.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170728/eca7724a/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Sat Jul 29 01:30:46 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 07:30:46 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

I am among those who are not really supporting holding another
intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review and
trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would make
sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning meeting. that
means 1 travel less for councilors at least.

Best,

Rafik


2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:

> Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>
> I think the two meetings should be held separately at different times of
> the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to different audiences
> [with some overlap].
>
> I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business hours,
> but some of our participants might find it easier to be able to travel to a
> meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting commence on a Sunday. I am
> not sure what others think about this suggestion, particularly those on the
> GNSO Council who would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out
> there...
>
> For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to me to
> have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN office for the
> majority of the likely participants.
>
> For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I understand
> that is not a view held by all) I also think Los Angeles makes a lot of
> sense, though I understand the participant profiles vary, and it may be
> very difficult for many of the Intersessional participants to travel to the
> United States. Based on the participant profiles of everyone who attended
> the Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much easier
> for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or Canadian visa does
> not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many in Latin America, Mexico?s
> immigration policies are very fair]. It would also be a rather economical
> choice.
>
> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
> Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
> Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
> UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>
>
> Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just
> forwarding....
>
> Stephanie
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:
> YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO
> Council strategic planning sessions
> Date:
> Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
> From:
> Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> <mary.wong at icann.org>
> To:
> Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> <psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Susan Kawaguchi
> <susankpolicy at gmail.com> <susankpolicy at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest
> <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, icannlists
> <icannlists at winston.com> <icannlists at winston.com>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
> <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de> <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>,
> Anthony Harris <anthonyrharris at gmail.com> <anthonyrharris at gmail.com>,
> Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, Milan,
> Stefania <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu> <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>, Marilia Maciel
> <mariliamaciel at gmail.com> <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Stephanie Perrin
> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>,
> Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
> <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com>
> <julf at julf.com>
> CC:
> Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org> <benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>
>
> Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony,
> Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>
>
>
> I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with the
> GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two face-to-face
> meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic
> planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot project for
> FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>
>
>
> As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had
> indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH
> Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, staff
> would like to know if you believe it will be *preferable for these two
> meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur
> within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it
> will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at
> different times in the year*.
>
>
>
> You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face
> meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting
> requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several
> months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the
> budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los
> Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the
> same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH
> Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>
>
>
> We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar
> year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. In
> addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH Intersessional is
> the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council.
> However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much
> input as possible from those community members who may be most affected by
> the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us with your
> opinion as to which option is preferred.
>
>
>
> Thanks and cheers
>
> Mary
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170729/341d9edc/attachment.htm>

From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca  Sat Jul 29 01:48:30 2017
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 18:48:30 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>

I am not enthusiastic about more meetings either.  And I am not keen on 
travelling to the US.....Los Angeles takes way longer than Iceland, for 
me, with way more hassle.  I have never been to Mexico, so I dont know 
how hard that is.  Am indifferent about putting the two meetings 
together, makes sense not to fly twice.

cheers SP


On 2017-07-28 18:30, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another 
> intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review 
> and trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would make 
> sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning meeting. 
> that means 1 travel less for councilors at least.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com 
> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>
>     Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>
>     I think the two meetings should be held separately at different
>     times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to
>     different audiences [with some overlap].
>
>     I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business
>     hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be
>     able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting
>     commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think about this
>     suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who would be
>     impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
>
>     For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to
>     me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN
>     office for the majority of the likely participants.
>
>     For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I
>     understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los
>     Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant
>     profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the
>     Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based
>     on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the
>     Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much
>     easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or
>     Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many
>     in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair]. It
>     would also be a rather economical choice.
>
>     Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>
>
>>     -------- Original Message --------
>>     Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for
>>     2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>     Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>>     UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>>     From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>     <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>     To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>
>>
>>     Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well,
>>     just forwarding....
>>
>>     Stephanie
>>
>>
>>
>>     -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>     Subject:
>>     	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional &
>>     GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>     Date:
>>     	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>>     From:
>>     	Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>
>>     To:
>>     	Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Susan
>>     Kawaguchi <susankpolicy at gmail.com>
>>     <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest
>>     <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>,
>>     icannlists <icannlists at winston.com>
>>     <mailto:icannlists at winston.com>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
>>     <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
>>     <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>, Anthony Harris
>>     <anthonyrharris at gmail.com> <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com>,
>>     Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>     <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, Milan, Stefania
>>     <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu> <mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>, Marilia
>>     Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>
>>     <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Stephanie Perrin
>>     <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>     <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Martin Pablo Silva
>>     Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
>>     <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Johan Helsingius
>>     <julf at julf.com> <mailto:julf at julf.com>
>>     CC:
>>     	Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>>     <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik,
>>     Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>
>>
>>     I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working
>>     with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan
>>     two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY 2018.
>>     One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO Council
>>     (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other is the
>>     periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>>
>>
>>     As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning
>>     meeting had indicated that this might take place in January 2018,
>>     and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken place in
>>     January or February, staff would like to know if you believe it
>>     will be _preferable for these two meetings to take place
>>     concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the space
>>     of a single week in the same location, or if you think it will be
>>     better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at
>>     different times in the year_.
>>
>>
>>     You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for
>>     face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017),
>>     such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel now
>>     have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the GNSO
>>     Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval requires
>>     an ICANN office location, with preference for Los Angeles ?
>>     hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the
>>     same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH
>>     Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>
>>
>>     We understand that, as these events are going to take place in
>>     calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the
>>     Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming
>>     concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the
>>     NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning
>>     purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as
>>     possible from those community members who may be most affected by
>>     the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us
>>     with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
>>
>>
>>     Thanks and cheers
>>
>>     Mary
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     NCSG-PC mailing list
>     NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>     https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170728/662621f4/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Sat Jul 29 12:41:40 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 05:41:40 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
	Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <mimiL0lc7l3UF1qAWANgjbrEPljh9kzEl6cL4xPY4SkAswMrqt45cV44zUhjmhMQ1lA7mMWOTb7a-UukU5miFBB70emir8zcDlSU1C5a17E=@ferdeline.com>

I think the Intersessional and the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Session are two distinct meetings, targeting two very different audiences. For that reason I believe they should be held at different times of the year and not amalgamated into one.
I am ambivalent as to location, though I tend to think both being held in Los Angeles makes sense given senior ICANN staff are already there. That said, I understand the US is very difficult for many people to travel to. I believe the broader Intersessional participant list contains individuals who will find it challenging to travel to the United States, whereas most (if not all) of the current GNSO Councillors can travel to the US with relative ease.
If the meetings are both held during the same week, a participant who is unable to travel that week will miss out on both meetings.
There is also the question of exhaustion. In my experience, people are very energetic for the first two to three days of a meeting; after that length of time, exhaustion and fatigue starts to set in. If we combine these two meetings into one, the latter one will suffer.
Finally, the two meetings being held at separate times of the year becomes a carrot which can be used to increase member engagement. We make do with remote meetings when we have to, but our output from face-to-face meetings seems to me to be higher.
Best wishes, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
> Local Time: July 28, 2017 11:48 PM
> UTC Time: July 28, 2017 10:48 PM
> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
> To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is
>
> I am not enthusiastic about more meetings either. And I am not keen on travelling to the US.....Los Angeles takes way longer than Iceland, for me, with way more hassle. I have never been to Mexico, so I dont know how hard that is. Am indifferent about putting the two meetings together, makes sense not to fly twice.
>
> cheers SP
>
> On 2017-07-28 18:30, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review and trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
>> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would make sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning meeting. that means 1 travel less for councilors at least.
>> Best,
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
>>
>>> Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>>> I think the two meetings should be held separately at different times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to different audiences [with some overlap].
>>> I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
>>> For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN office for the majority of the likely participants.
>>> For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair]. It would also be a rather economical choice.
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>> Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>>>> UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>>>> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just forwarding....
>>>>
>>>> Stephanie
>>>>
>>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>> Subject:	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>> Date:	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>>>> From:	Mary Wong [<mary.wong at icann.org>](mailto:mary.wong at icann.org)
>>>> To:	Phil Corwin [<psc at vlaw-dc.com>](mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com), Susan Kawaguchi [<susankpolicy at gmail.com>](mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com), Heather Forrest [<haforrestesq at gmail.com>](mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com), icannlists [<icannlists at winston.com>](mailto:icannlists at winston.com), Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben [<wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>](mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de), Anthony Harris [<anthonyrharris at gmail.com>](mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com), Rafik Dammak [<rafik.dammak at gmail.com>](mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com), Milan, Stefania [<Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>](mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu), Marilia Maciel [<mariliamaciel at gmail.com>](mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com), Stephanie Perrin [<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>](mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca), Martin Pablo Silva Valent [<mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>](mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com), Johan Helsingius [<julf at julf.com>](mailto:julf at julf.com)
>>>> CC:	Benedetta Rossi [<benedetta.rossi at icann.org>](mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org)
>>>>
>>>> Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>>>
>>>> I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>>>>
>>>> As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, staff would like to know if you believe it will be preferable for these two meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at different times in the year.
>>>>
>>>> You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>>>
>>>> We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as possible from those community members who may be most affected by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks and cheers
>>>>
>>>> Mary
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170729/6d47f23a/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Sat Jul 29 12:58:23 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 05:58:23 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
	Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <CAEux40tnEw_0T8YRfj6k+EvJnQrcScXQfy+BXH4P2NXuH5fPRQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAEux40tnEw_0T8YRfj6k+EvJnQrcScXQfy+BXH4P2NXuH5fPRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d1pth8KqxoSprqkMJEiwsxjygLbWrCUyHr4iGchYdMAtsL_5LUD9pUGPpw7Ydra8FCQr_4cx-7LopwiJ7Bvl3-FQmHOGQmXe1LO7ltQyA9Y=@ferdeline.com>

Hi Poncelet,
I have enquired several times as to the cost of hosting the Intersessional in Reykjavik earlier this year, but have not received a formal response. That said, I have reason to believe the cost of hosting the meeting in Iceland was significantly more than previous meetings in LA and DC.
I have just checked the visa requirements for Mexico, and I really do not think we could find a country easier for the vast majority of participants to enter. Anyone, no matter their nationality, who already holds a valid visa for Canada, Japan, the US, UK, or any Schengen Member State can enter Mexico for 180 days. Those who do not have such a visa (but have an onward plane ticket) can obtain a Mexican visa on arrival.
I also believe the cost of flights to Mexico City (for the vast majority of participants), as well as hotel and venue hire, would be considerably less than Iceland or the US. To test that theory, I just had a look on the ITA Flight Matrix for flights from Banjul to Mexico City and Banjul to Reykjavik in late January, and flights to Mexico are one-third of the price of heading to Iceland.
I think Mexico is worth considering for the Intersessional. LA continues to make sense to me for the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Session.
Best wishes, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
> Local Time: July 28, 2017 12:22 PM
> UTC Time: July 28, 2017 11:22 AM
> From: pileleji at ymca.gm
> To: Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
> Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>
> Thanks Ayden,
> Much appreciated in response to Stephanie email, I totally concur with majority of your comments. However for the intersessional, Cost in terms of travel and easier access I suggest we stick to Iceland as the last one showed, it ticked all the boxes. So for me the way Iceland has made their destination very flexible and appealing as a transit hub to Europe, North America and others, makes it a good choice. Flight cost and easy transit from Europe makes it a perfect fit to me. My 0.000001% addition.
> Kind Regards
> Poncelet
>
> On 28 July 2017 at 11:57, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>> I think the two meetings should be held separately at different times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to different audiences [with some overlap].
>> I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
>> For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN office for the majority of the likely participants.
>> For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair]. It would also be a rather economical choice.
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>> Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>>> UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>>> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>
>>> Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just forwarding....
>>>
>>> Stephanie
>>>
>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> Subject:	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>> Date:	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>>> From:	Mary Wong [<mary.wong at icann.org>](mailto:mary.wong at icann.org)
>>> To:	Phil Corwin [<psc at vlaw-dc.com>](mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com), Susan Kawaguchi [<susankpolicy at gmail.com>](mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com), Heather Forrest [<haforrestesq at gmail.com>](mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com), icannlists [<icannlists at winston.com>](mailto:icannlists at winston.com), Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben [<wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>](mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de), Anthony Harris [<anthonyrharris at gmail.com>](mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com), Rafik Dammak [<rafik.dammak at gmail.com>](mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com), Milan, Stefania [<Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>](mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu), Marilia Maciel [<mariliamaciel at gmail.com>](mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com), Stephanie Perrin [<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>](mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca), Martin Pablo Silva Valent [<mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>](mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com), Johan Helsingius [<julf at julf.com>](mailto:julf at julf.com)
>>> CC:	Benedetta Rossi [<benedetta.rossi at icann.org>](mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org)
>>>
>>> Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>>
>>> I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>>>
>>> As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, staff would like to know if you believe it will be preferable for these two meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at different times in the year.
>>>
>>> You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>>
>>> We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as possible from those community members who may be most affected by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
>>>
>>> Thanks and cheers
>>>
>>> Mary
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
> --
>
> Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
> Coordinator
> The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
> MDI Road Kanifing South
> P. O. Box 421 Banjul
> The Gambia, West Africa
> Tel: (220) 4370240
> Fax:(220) 4390793
> Cell:(220) 9912508
> Skype: pons_utd
> www.ymca.gm
> http://jokkolabs.net/en/
> www.waigf.org
> [www,insistglobal.com](http://www.itag.gm)
> www.npoc.org
> http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753www.diplointernetgovernance.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170729/ed51f367/attachment.htm>

From mpsilvavalent at gmail.com  Sat Jul 29 16:26:14 2017
From: mpsilvavalent at gmail.com (Martin Pablo Silva Valent)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 10:26:14 -0300
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <46B5388A-FEDF-4936-895E-C95ACA5C55DE@gmail.com>

I agree with almost everything said. There are levels of truth in all of them. I only support the idea of the meeting if we have a very well thought plan of action that squeeze out the potential of such a reunion. Last ones felt that the potential was not met, but I understands this meetings were in pilot mode so I understand if we are still looking for the correct format/planning, if there is any. 

I also think is convenient to mash up both meetings, since NCPH is a part of GNSO, but, since I?ve never been to a GNSO Council Planning meeting, so I have no idea if they are or not mashable. In my case, as in the case of almost all councilors, traveling is a cost, we have to put in place whole systems to keep life going while we are absent. So anything that makes easier that part I will celebrate. I?m OK with LA or DC, and I agree Mexico is also a very fare place to do it.

So, to summarize, I will support another meeting of this, as long as we can make a sense out of it, incline cost wise for ICANN and us.

Cheers,
Mart?n


 

> On Jul 28, 2017, at 7:48 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.c <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.c>a> wrote:
> 
> I am not enthusiastic about more meetings either.  And I am not keen on travelling to the US.....Los Angeles takes way longer than Iceland, for me, with way more hassle.  I have never been to Mexico, so I dont know how hard that is.  Am indifferent about putting the two meetings together, makes sense not to fly twice.
> 
> cheers SP
> 
> On 2017-07-28 18:30, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review and trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
>> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would make sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning meeting. that means 1 travel less for councilors at least. 
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Rafik
>> 
>> 
>> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>> Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>> 
>> I think the two meetings should be held separately at different times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to different audiences [with some overlap].
>> 
>> I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
>> 
>> For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN office for the majority of the likely participants.
>> 
>> For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair]. It would also be a rather economical choice.
>> 
>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline 
>> 
>> 
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>> Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>>> UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>>> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just forwarding....
>>> Stephanie
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> Subject:
>>> YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>> Date:
>>> Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>>> From:
>>> Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>
>>> To:
>>> Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Susan Kawaguchi <susankpolicy at gmail.com> <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>, icannlists <icannlists at winston.com> <mailto:icannlists at winston.com>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de> <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>, Anthony Harris <anthonyrharris at gmail.com> <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, Milan, Stefania <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu> <mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com> <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com> <mailto:julf at julf.com>
>>> CC:
>>> Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org> <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>>  
>>> I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>>>  
>>> As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, staff would like to know if you believe it will be preferable for these two meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at different times in the year.
>>>  
>>> You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>>  
>>> We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as possible from those community members who may be most affected by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us with your opinion as                             to which option is preferred.
>>>  
>>> Thanks and cheers
>>> Mary
>>>  
>>>  
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170729/84404b8e/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Sat Jul 29 17:03:58 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 10:03:58 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
	Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <46B5388A-FEDF-4936-895E-C95ACA5C55DE@gmail.com>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <46B5388A-FEDF-4936-895E-C95ACA5C55DE@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <l_B0pOYRe2v2xelXALo71EBOIzjExX_ZfhbFgqIeYW__fOICPp5A6lUJDlE_b9FGPTimwLU0JdNvWw2VkI4hacRS_2K0R8WuiliE9U5PY9s=@ferdeline.com>

I really resist the idea of merging these two distinct meetings into one, not least because if the dates do not work well, one misses both meetings rather than just the one.
We are also volunteers and have commitments outside of ICANN. A question I thus have is, isn't it easier to escape for three days, especially if the meeting began on a Sunday? One could thus travel on the Saturday, take a red eye on the Tuesday, and be home by Wednesday AM.
Best wishes, Ayden

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 2:26 pm, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with almost everything said. There are levels of truth in all of them. I only support the idea of the meeting if we have a very well thought plan of action that squeeze out the potential of such a reunion. Last ones felt that the potential was not met, but I understands this meetings were in pilot mode so I understand if we are still looking for the correct format/planning, if there is any.
> I also think is convenient to mash up both meetings, since NCPH is a part of GNSO, but, since I?ve never been to a GNSO Council Planning meeting, so I have no idea if they are or not mashable. In my case, as in the case of almost all councilors, traveling is a cost, we have to put in place whole systems to keep life going while we are absent. So anything that makes easier that part I will celebrate. I?m OK with LA or DC, and I agree Mexico is also a very fare place to do it.
> So, to summarize, I will support another meeting of this, as long as we can make a sense out of it, incline cost wise for ICANN and us.
> Cheers,
> Mart?n
>
>> On Jul 28, 2017, at 7:48 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.c
>
>> a> wrote:
>>
>> I am not enthusiastic about more meetings either. And I am not keen on travelling to the US.....Los Angeles takes way longer than Iceland, for me, with way more hassle. I have never been to Mexico, so I dont know how hard that is. Am indifferent about putting the two meetings together, makes sense not to fly twice.
>>
>> cheers SP
>>
>> On 2017-07-28 18:30, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review and trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
>>> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would make sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning meeting. that means 1 travel less for councilors at least.
>>> Best,
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>>>> I think the two meetings should be held separately at different times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to different audiences [with some overlap].
>>>> I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
>>>> For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN office for the majority of the likely participants.
>>>> For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair]. It would also be a rather economical choice.
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>>> Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>>>>> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>>>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just forwarding....
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephanie
>>>>>
>>>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>>> Subject:	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>>> Date:	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>>>>> From:	Mary Wong [<mary.wong at icann.org>](mailto:mary.wong at icann.org)
>>>>> To:	Phil Corwin [<psc at vlaw-dc.com>](mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com), Susan Kawaguchi [<susankpolicy at gmail.com>](mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com), Heather Forrest [<haforrestesq at gmail.com>](mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com), icannlists [<icannlists at winston.com>](mailto:icannlists at winston.com), Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben [<wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>](mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de), Anthony Harris [<anthonyrharris at gmail.com>](mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com), Rafik Dammak [<rafik.dammak at gmail.com>](mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com), Milan, Stefania [<Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>](mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu), Marilia Maciel [<mariliamaciel at gmail.com>](mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com), Stephanie Perrin [<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>](mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca), Martin Pablo Silva Valent [<mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>](mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com), Johan Helsingius [<julf at julf.com>](mailto:julf at julf.com)
>>>>> CC:	Benedetta Rossi [<benedetta.rossi at icann.org>](mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org)
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>>>>>
>>>>> As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, staff would like to know if you believe it will be preferable for these two meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at different times in the year.
>>>>>
>>>>> You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as possible from those community members who may be most affected by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks and cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> Mary
>>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170729/e4acab95/attachment.htm>

From avri at apc.org  Sat Jul 29 20:01:25 2017
From: avri at apc.org (avri doria)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 13:01:25 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <50689cd9-39be-eb87-8d8e-0e8b83e167fa@apc.org>

(observer)

I think that the annual conversation between CSG et al and NCSG et al,
is a good thing and an important thing. I think it also should be
coordinated with staff contacts so that both CSG and NCSG can hear the
same things.

I think the GNSO council et al spending some time in retreat is also
important for building a council that can sustain working together. It
can't happen at the full meetings, so makes sense that it happen outside
that.  I think this should also be don with staff access.

I think all of these meetings are best done in proximity to an ICANN
office and offset from the 3 main meetings.

The meetings need planning and focus, but I do not believe it wise to
let them drop.

avri



On 28-Jul-17 18:48, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>
> I am not enthusiastic about more meetings either.  And I am not keen
> on travelling to the US.....Los Angeles takes way longer than Iceland,
> for me, with way more hassle.  I have never been to Mexico, so I dont
> know how hard that is.  Am indifferent about putting the two meetings
> together, makes sense not to fly twice.
>
> cheers SP
>
>
> On 2017-07-28 18:30, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another
>> intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review
>> and trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
>> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would
>> make sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning
>> meeting. that means 1 travel less for councilors at least. 
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>>
>>     Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>>
>>     I think the two meetings should be held separately at different
>>     times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to
>>     different audiences [with some overlap].
>>
>>     I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business
>>     hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be
>>     able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the
>>     meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think
>>     about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who
>>     would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
>>
>>     For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense
>>     to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN
>>     office for the majority of the likely participants.
>>
>>     For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I
>>     understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los
>>     Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant
>>     profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the
>>     Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based
>>     on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the
>>     Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much
>>     easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or
>>     Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many
>>     in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair].
>>     It would also be a rather economical choice.
>>
>>     Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline 
>>
>>
>>>     -------- Original Message --------
>>>     Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for
>>>     2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>     Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>>>     UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>>>     From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>>     <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>>     To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well,
>>>     just forwarding....
>>>
>>>     Stephanie
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>     Subject:
>>>     	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional
>>>     & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>     Date:
>>>     	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>>>     From:
>>>     	Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>
>>>     To:
>>>     	Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Susan
>>>     Kawaguchi <susankpolicy at gmail.com>
>>>     <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest
>>>     <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>,
>>>     icannlists <icannlists at winston.com>
>>>     <mailto:icannlists at winston.com>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
>>>     <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
>>>     <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>, Anthony Harris
>>>     <anthonyrharris at gmail.com> <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com>,
>>>     Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>     <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, Milan, Stefania
>>>     <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu> <mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>, Marilia
>>>     Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>
>>>     <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Stephanie Perrin
>>>     <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>>     <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Martin Pablo Silva
>>>     Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
>>>     <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Johan Helsingius
>>>     <julf at julf.com> <mailto:julf at julf.com>
>>>     CC:
>>>     	Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>>>     <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik,
>>>     Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>     I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin
>>>     working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership
>>>     to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY
>>>     2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO
>>>     Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other
>>>     is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>     As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning
>>>     meeting had indicated that this might take place in January
>>>     2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken
>>>     place in January or February, staff would like to know if you
>>>     believe it will be _preferable for these two meetings to take
>>>     place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the
>>>     space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it
>>>     will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking
>>>     place at different times in the year_.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>     You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for
>>>     face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June
>>>     2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel
>>>     now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the
>>>     GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval
>>>     requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los
>>>     Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently
>>>     in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that
>>>     the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>     We understand that, as these events are going to take place in
>>>     calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the
>>>     Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming
>>>     concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the
>>>     NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning
>>>     purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as
>>>     possible from those community members who may be most affected
>>>     by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide
>>>     us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>     Thanks and cheers
>>>
>>>     Mary
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     NCSG-PC mailing list
>>     NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>>     https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



From avri at apc.org  Sat Jul 29 20:05:01 2017
From: avri at apc.org (avri doria)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 13:05:01 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: []council to finalise updated GNSO Review of the
 GAC Communique
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThnUYCVT-CQT=n2PnzRUkZfSSd49cYXN8SH9cnP0yfzCzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sThnUYCVT-CQT=n2PnzRUkZfSSd49cYXN8SH9cnP0yfzCzg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3fceb282-56b1-bf9c-b26b-6b48299a247e@apc.org>

(observer)

Hi,

on the geo-names issue:

I wonder why mention a ccnso pdp - that seems to be tempting the bears.

I would remove  "rather than initiate a ccNSO PDP on country and
territory names at the top-level"

Otherwise i do not see the problem.

avri

On 27-Jul-17 20:28, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> hi all,
>
> the discussion about the text for geonames in GNSO response is
> ongoing. we should agree on what can be acceptable for NCSG.
> @Avri any thought on this? is the new text helpful for the subsequent
> procedures WG?
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Austin, Donna via council* <council at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> Date: 2017-07-28 0:11 GMT+09:00
> Subject: Re: [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the
> GAC Communique
> To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com
> <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>>, GNSO Council List
> <council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>"
> <gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>>, Jeff Neuman
> <jeff.neuman at valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman at valideus.com>>
>
>
> Heather, All
>
>  
>
> During an RySG call yesterday there was considerable discussion about
> the merits of each of the proposed options relating to the geographic
> names.
>
>  
>
> I understand (and sincerely apologise) this request is late in the
> day; however, the RySG has requested that consideration be given to a
> potential third option that would serve to replace both Option A and
> Option B. As you will see, this third option contains the main
> elements of both Option A and B, and also addresses the comment from
> Paul McGrady that the response call out the community discussions in
> Johannesburg:
>
>  
>
> /The GNSO Council also takes note of the ?Geographic Names as
> Top-Level Domains? section of the communiqu? restating previous advice
> and positions. Among those positions are references that imply that
> certain geographic top-level domains should be addressed by, and only
> through, a ccNSO PDP. With respect to that position we note that
> rather than initiative a ccNSO PDP on country and territory names at
> the top-level, the ccNSO established a Cross Community Working Group
> on the Use of Country and Territory Names (CCWG UCTN) that was jointly
> chartered by the ccNSO and GNSO. The CCWG UCTN recently produced a
> final report, but was unable to provide recommendations on the use of
> country and territory names as TLDs, beyond the use of two-characters.
> The GNSO strongly believes that these issues are currently within the
> scope and charter of the GNSO Policy Development Process on New gTLD
> Subsequent Procedures (SubPro PDP). As a result of the recent Cross
> Community Discussions on geographic names conducted at ICANN 59, the
> SubPro PDP is establishing a new Work Track 5 on Geographic Names at
> the Top Level and inviting representatives from each of the SOs and
> ACs to form a Leadership Team for that Work Track. The GNSO Council
> encourages participation from the community, including the GAC, in
> that SubPro PDP to ensure a multi-stakeholder bottom up solution to
> this issue./
>
> / /
>
> /This approach is consistent with the GAC?s position also contained in
> the ?Geographic Names as Top-Level Domains? section of the communiqu?
> ? ? that any further process of policy review and development should:
> (a) continue to allow all stakeholder groups to participate equally;
> (b) take into account the history and rationale of the arrangements
> currently in place; and (c) apply an evidence-based policy approach to
> any proposals for future arrangements.?/
>
>  
>
> As Rubens has already noted on the Council list, the respective
> authors of Options A and B both recognize potential shortcomings of
> their suggested text and to that end both Rubens and Jeff both support
> the proposed amendment.
>
> Thank you for considering this late amendment, which serves to replace
> both Option A and Option B.
>
>  
>
> Donna
>
>  
>
> *From:*council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>
> [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Heather Forrest
> *Sent:* Monday, July 24, 2017 5:54 AM
> *To:* GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org
> <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> *Cc:* gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the GAC
> Communique
>
>  
>
> Dear Council colleagues,
>
>  
>
> We have reached a point of near finalization of the GNSO Response to
> the GAC Johannesburg Communique. The one outstanding item amongst the
> members of the revision team is the text relating to geographic names.
> You'll see this text in the attached draft as Option A and Option B. 
>
>  
>
> For our input to reach the Board in time for its meeting with the GAC
> in the week of 14 August, we cannot push this out to the next Council
> meeting in late August. For our response to be timely and effective,
> we need a Communique Response that we can agree on in full before it
> goes to electronic vote.
>
>  
>
> We had scheduled an electronic Council vote to open this Thursday, but
> we don't yet have a final text to vote on. Hence I propose we delay
> the electronic vote to open next Monday to give us all time to
> consider and take instructions (if appropriate) on Option A and B. 
>
>  
>
> To help us get to final, votable text, please could you review the
> attached and complete the Doodle to express support for either Option
> A or B on geo names. 
>
>
> *Doodle:* https://icannorg.doodle.com/poll/yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icannorg.doodle.com_poll_yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=YCVgcMubkaHFRHLFtfeKImXTW8Nipr07HJGcexh2XrE&s=kIS8BXv4sOul3g4opzWC6lqtvhe6Vhm1XpK9VFYJwZM&e=>
>
>  
>
> *Timeline*:
>
> ?Monday, 24 July: Doodle (to select Option A or B on geo names text) opens
>
> ?Friday, 28 July: Doodle closes
>
> ?Monday, 31 July: Electronic vote on Council motion approving the GNSO
> Response to GAC Joburg Communique (including preferred Option A or B)
> opens
>
> ?Friday, 4 August: Electronic vote closes
>
> ?Monday, 7 August: GNSO Response to GAC Communique transmitted to Board
>
>  
>
> Many thanks to Marika and the Secretariat team for helping to
> coordinate both the Doodle and e-vote in such a tight timeframe. Also
> noting that James and Donna are both away today, so I'm on point to
> shepherd this through.
>
>  
>
> Best wishes to all,
>
>  
>
> Heather
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
>
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca  Sat Jul 29 20:59:00 2017
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 13:59:00 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <50689cd9-39be-eb87-8d8e-0e8b83e167fa@apc.org>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <50689cd9-39be-eb87-8d8e-0e8b83e167fa@apc.org>
Message-ID: <aa8a0326-deb1-e5be-0f7f-05d83f21ff99@mail.utoronto.ca>

You make some good points.  Probably I am just feeling cheap and broke; 
these things always cost me money.

cheers Steph


On 2017-07-29 13:01, avri doria wrote:
> (observer)
>
> I think that the annual conversation between CSG et al and NCSG et al,
> is a good thing and an important thing. I think it also should be
> coordinated with staff contacts so that both CSG and NCSG can hear the
> same things.
>
> I think the GNSO council et al spending some time in retreat is also
> important for building a council that can sustain working together. It
> can't happen at the full meetings, so makes sense that it happen outside
> that.  I think this should also be don with staff access.
>
> I think all of these meetings are best done in proximity to an ICANN
> office and offset from the 3 main meetings.
>
> The meetings need planning and focus, but I do not believe it wise to
> let them drop.
>
> avri
>
>
>
> On 28-Jul-17 18:48, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>> I am not enthusiastic about more meetings either.  And I am not keen
>> on travelling to the US.....Los Angeles takes way longer than Iceland,
>> for me, with way more hassle.  I have never been to Mexico, so I dont
>> know how hard that is.  Am indifferent about putting the two meetings
>> together, makes sense not to fly twice.
>>
>> cheers SP
>>
>>
>> On 2017-07-28 18:30, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another
>>> intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review
>>> and trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
>>> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would
>>> make sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning
>>> meeting. that means 1 travel less for councilors at least.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
>>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>>>
>>>      Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>>>
>>>      I think the two meetings should be held separately at different
>>>      times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to
>>>      different audiences [with some overlap].
>>>
>>>      I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business
>>>      hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be
>>>      able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the
>>>      meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think
>>>      about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who
>>>      would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
>>>
>>>      For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense
>>>      to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN
>>>      office for the majority of the likely participants.
>>>
>>>      For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I
>>>      understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los
>>>      Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant
>>>      profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the
>>>      Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based
>>>      on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the
>>>      Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much
>>>      easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or
>>>      Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many
>>>      in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair].
>>>      It would also be a rather economical choice.
>>>
>>>      Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>>
>>>
>>>>      -------- Original Message --------
>>>>      Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for
>>>>      2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>>      Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>>>>      UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>>>>      From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>>>      <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>>>      To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well,
>>>>      just forwarding....
>>>>
>>>>      Stephanie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>>      Subject:
>>>>      	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional
>>>>      & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>>      Date:
>>>>      	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>>>>      From:
>>>>      	Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>
>>>>      To:
>>>>      	Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Susan
>>>>      Kawaguchi <susankpolicy at gmail.com>
>>>>      <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest
>>>>      <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>,
>>>>      icannlists <icannlists at winston.com>
>>>>      <mailto:icannlists at winston.com>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
>>>>      <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>
>>>>      <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>, Anthony Harris
>>>>      <anthonyrharris at gmail.com> <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com>,
>>>>      Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>>      <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, Milan, Stefania
>>>>      <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu> <mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>, Marilia
>>>>      Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>
>>>>      <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Stephanie Perrin
>>>>      <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>>>      <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Martin Pablo Silva
>>>>      Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
>>>>      <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Johan Helsingius
>>>>      <julf at julf.com> <mailto:julf at julf.com>
>>>>      CC:
>>>>      	Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>>>>      <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik,
>>>>      Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>
>>>>      I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin
>>>>      working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership
>>>>      to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY
>>>>      2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO
>>>>      Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other
>>>>      is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>
>>>>      As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning
>>>>      meeting had indicated that this might take place in January
>>>>      2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken
>>>>      place in January or February, staff would like to know if you
>>>>      believe it will be _preferable for these two meetings to take
>>>>      place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the
>>>>      space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it
>>>>      will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking
>>>>      place at different times in the year_.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>
>>>>      You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for
>>>>      face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June
>>>>      2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel
>>>>      now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the
>>>>      GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval
>>>>      requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los
>>>>      Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently
>>>>      in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that
>>>>      the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>
>>>>      We understand that, as these events are going to take place in
>>>>      calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the
>>>>      Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming
>>>>      concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the
>>>>      NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning
>>>>      purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as
>>>>      possible from those community members who may be most affected
>>>>      by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide
>>>>      us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>
>>>>      Thanks and cheers
>>>>
>>>>      Mary
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>
>>>
>>>      _______________________________________________
>>>      NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>      NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>      https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>      <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170729/306aa093/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Sun Jul 30 01:51:24 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2017 07:51:24 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: []council to finalise updated GNSO Review of the
	GAC Communique
In-Reply-To: <3fceb282-56b1-bf9c-b26b-6b48299a247e@apc.org>
References: <CAH5sThnUYCVT-CQT=n2PnzRUkZfSSd49cYXN8SH9cnP0yfzCzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <3fceb282-56b1-bf9c-b26b-6b48299a247e@apc.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThmnjUiuCfv74c_5K-1bWM_4ykLO_jP+XKhcik3rCSSD9w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Avri,

Thanks for the comment, I concur with you that having such mention is not
helpful and can backfire.

Best,

Rafik

2017-07-30 2:05 GMT+09:00 avri doria <avri at apc.org>:

> (observer)
>
> Hi,
>
> on the geo-names issue:
>
> I wonder why mention a ccnso pdp - that seems to be tempting the bears.
>
> I would remove  "rather than initiate a ccNSO PDP on country and
> territory names at the top-level"
>
> Otherwise i do not see the problem.
>
> avri
>
> On 27-Jul-17 20:28, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> > hi all,
> >
> > the discussion about the text for geonames in GNSO response is
> > ongoing. we should agree on what can be acceptable for NCSG.
> > @Avri any thought on this? is the new text helpful for the subsequent
> > procedures WG?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Rafik
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: *Austin, Donna via council* <council at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> > Date: 2017-07-28 0:11 GMT+09:00
> > Subject: Re: [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the
> > GAC Communique
> > To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com
> > <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>>, GNSO Council List
> > <council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> > Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>"
> > <gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>>, Jeff Neuman
> > <jeff.neuman at valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman at valideus.com>>
> >
> >
> > Heather, All
> >
> >
> >
> > During an RySG call yesterday there was considerable discussion about
> > the merits of each of the proposed options relating to the geographic
> > names.
> >
> >
> >
> > I understand (and sincerely apologise) this request is late in the
> > day; however, the RySG has requested that consideration be given to a
> > potential third option that would serve to replace both Option A and
> > Option B. As you will see, this third option contains the main
> > elements of both Option A and B, and also addresses the comment from
> > Paul McGrady that the response call out the community discussions in
> > Johannesburg:
> >
> >
> >
> > /The GNSO Council also takes note of the ?Geographic Names as
> > Top-Level Domains? section of the communiqu? restating previous advice
> > and positions. Among those positions are references that imply that
> > certain geographic top-level domains should be addressed by, and only
> > through, a ccNSO PDP. With respect to that position we note that
> > rather than initiative a ccNSO PDP on country and territory names at
> > the top-level, the ccNSO established a Cross Community Working Group
> > on the Use of Country and Territory Names (CCWG UCTN) that was jointly
> > chartered by the ccNSO and GNSO. The CCWG UCTN recently produced a
> > final report, but was unable to provide recommendations on the use of
> > country and territory names as TLDs, beyond the use of two-characters.
> > The GNSO strongly believes that these issues are currently within the
> > scope and charter of the GNSO Policy Development Process on New gTLD
> > Subsequent Procedures (SubPro PDP). As a result of the recent Cross
> > Community Discussions on geographic names conducted at ICANN 59, the
> > SubPro PDP is establishing a new Work Track 5 on Geographic Names at
> > the Top Level and inviting representatives from each of the SOs and
> > ACs to form a Leadership Team for that Work Track. The GNSO Council
> > encourages participation from the community, including the GAC, in
> > that SubPro PDP to ensure a multi-stakeholder bottom up solution to
> > this issue./
> >
> > / /
> >
> > /This approach is consistent with the GAC?s position also contained in
> > the ?Geographic Names as Top-Level Domains? section of the communiqu?
> > ? ? that any further process of policy review and development should:
> > (a) continue to allow all stakeholder groups to participate equally;
> > (b) take into account the history and rationale of the arrangements
> > currently in place; and (c) apply an evidence-based policy approach to
> > any proposals for future arrangements.?/
> >
> >
> >
> > As Rubens has already noted on the Council list, the respective
> > authors of Options A and B both recognize potential shortcomings of
> > their suggested text and to that end both Rubens and Jeff both support
> > the proposed amendment.
> >
> > Thank you for considering this late amendment, which serves to replace
> > both Option A and Option B.
> >
> >
> >
> > Donna
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:*council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>
> > [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Heather Forrest
> > *Sent:* Monday, July 24, 2017 5:54 AM
> > *To:* GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> > *Cc:* gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>
> > *Subject:* [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the GAC
> > Communique
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Council colleagues,
> >
> >
> >
> > We have reached a point of near finalization of the GNSO Response to
> > the GAC Johannesburg Communique. The one outstanding item amongst the
> > members of the revision team is the text relating to geographic names.
> > You'll see this text in the attached draft as Option A and Option B.
> >
> >
> >
> > For our input to reach the Board in time for its meeting with the GAC
> > in the week of 14 August, we cannot push this out to the next Council
> > meeting in late August. For our response to be timely and effective,
> > we need a Communique Response that we can agree on in full before it
> > goes to electronic vote.
> >
> >
> >
> > We had scheduled an electronic Council vote to open this Thursday, but
> > we don't yet have a final text to vote on. Hence I propose we delay
> > the electronic vote to open next Monday to give us all time to
> > consider and take instructions (if appropriate) on Option A and B.
> >
> >
> >
> > To help us get to final, votable text, please could you review the
> > attached and complete the Doodle to express support for either Option
> > A or B on geo names.
> >
> >
> > *Doodle:* https://icannorg.doodle.com/poll/yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t
> > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__icannorg.doodle.com_poll_yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t&d=DwMFaQ&c=
> MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=
> YCVgcMubkaHFRHLFtfeKImXTW8Nipr07HJGcexh2XrE&s=
> kIS8BXv4sOul3g4opzWC6lqtvhe6Vhm1XpK9VFYJwZM&e=>
> >
> >
> >
> > *Timeline*:
> >
> > ?Monday, 24 July: Doodle (to select Option A or B on geo names text)
> opens
> >
> > ?Friday, 28 July: Doodle closes
> >
> > ?Monday, 31 July: Electronic vote on Council motion approving the GNSO
> > Response to GAC Joburg Communique (including preferred Option A or B)
> > opens
> >
> > ?Friday, 4 August: Electronic vote closes
> >
> > ?Monday, 7 August: GNSO Response to GAC Communique transmitted to Board
> >
> >
> >
> > Many thanks to Marika and the Secretariat team for helping to
> > coordinate both the Doodle and e-vote in such a tight timeframe. Also
> > noting that James and Donna are both away today, so I'm on point to
> > shepherd this through.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best wishes to all,
> >
> >
> >
> > Heather
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > council mailing list
> > council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
> > <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170730/de451980/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Sun Jul 30 04:01:07 2017
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2017 10:01:07 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
	Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <50689cd9-39be-eb87-8d8e-0e8b83e167fa@apc.org>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <50689cd9-39be-eb87-8d8e-0e8b83e167fa@apc.org>
Message-ID: <AA0A2B79-A19A-42CA-B70D-21128800812F@gmail.com>

(also observer)

+1 I thought the two meetings I participated in when chair were useful in terms of relational bridge building, clearly identifying areas of agreement/disagreement/possible joint actions between NCSG/CSG, and thinking about the NCPH trajectory in general in light of the evolution due to the new gTLDs.  At one of them, we also managed to do a very good outreach session which ultimately helped encourage important CSOs to join.  If the argument is that some folks e.g. Councilors feel too tapped out to attend, then send other members who are available and interested, as long as there?s preparation and a clear mandate and any actual decisions come back to the general membership and ?leadership? bodies for vetting before action I don?t see the problem.  Could help with onboarding into WG work etc. too. Proximity to an office for logistics, not wandering the earth in search of post-meeting tourism.

Bill

> On Jul 30, 2017, at 02:01, avri doria <avri at apc.org> wrote:
> 
> (observer)
> 
> I think that the annual conversation between CSG et al and NCSG et al,
> is a good thing and an important thing. I think it also should be
> coordinated with staff contacts so that both CSG and NCSG can hear the
> same things.
> 
> I think the GNSO council et al spending some time in retreat is also
> important for building a council that can sustain working together. It
> can't happen at the full meetings, so makes sense that it happen outside
> that.  I think this should also be don with staff access.
> 
> I think all of these meetings are best done in proximity to an ICANN
> office and offset from the 3 main meetings.
> 
> The meetings need planning and focus, but I do not believe it wise to
> let them drop.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> On 28-Jul-17 18:48, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>> 
>> I am not enthusiastic about more meetings either.  And I am not keen
>> on travelling to the US.....Los Angeles takes way longer than Iceland,
>> for me, with way more hassle.  I have never been to Mexico, so I dont
>> know how hard that is.  Am indifferent about putting the two meetings
>> together, makes sense not to fly twice.
>> 
>> cheers SP
>> 
>> 
>> On 2017-07-28 18:30, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another
>>> intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review
>>> and trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
>>> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would
>>> make sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning
>>> meeting. that means 1 travel less for councilors at least. 
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Rafik
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
>>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>>:
>>> 
>>>    Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>>> 
>>>    I think the two meetings should be held separately at different
>>>    times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to
>>>    different audiences [with some overlap].
>>> 
>>>    I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business
>>>    hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be
>>>    able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the
>>>    meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think
>>>    about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who
>>>    would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
>>> 
>>>    For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense
>>>    to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN
>>>    office for the majority of the likely participants.
>>> 
>>>    For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I
>>>    understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los
>>>    Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant
>>>    profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the
>>>    Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based
>>>    on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the
>>>    Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much
>>>    easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or
>>>    Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many
>>>    in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair].
>>>    It would also be a rather economical choice.
>>> 
>>>    Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>    -------- Original Message --------
>>>>    Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for
>>>>    2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>>    Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>>>>    UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>>>>    From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
>>>>    <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>
>>>>    To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well,
>>>>    just forwarding....
>>>> 
>>>>    Stephanie
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>>    Subject:
>>>>    	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional
>>>>    & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>>>>    Date:
>>>>    	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>>>>    From:
>>>>    	Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>> <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>>
>>>>    To:
>>>>    	Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>> <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>>, Susan
>>>>    Kawaguchi <susankpolicy at gmail.com <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com>>
>>>>    <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com>>, Heather Forrest
>>>>    <haforrestesq at gmail.com <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>> <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>>,
>>>>    icannlists <icannlists at winston.com <mailto:icannlists at winston.com>>
>>>>    <mailto:icannlists at winston.com <mailto:icannlists at winston.com>>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
>>>>    <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>>
>>>>    <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>>, Anthony Harris
>>>>    <anthonyrharris at gmail.com <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com>> <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com>>,
>>>>    Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>
>>>>    <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>, Milan, Stefania
>>>>    <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu <mailto:Stefania.Milan at eui.eu>> <mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu <mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>>, Marilia
>>>>    Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>>
>>>>    <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>>, Stephanie Perrin
>>>>    <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>
>>>>    <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>, Martin Pablo Silva
>>>>    Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>>
>>>>    <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>>, Johan Helsingius
>>>>    <julf at julf.com <mailto:julf at julf.com>> <mailto:julf at julf.com <mailto:julf at julf.com>>
>>>>    CC:
>>>>    	Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org>>
>>>>    <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org>>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik,
>>>>    Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin
>>>>    working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership
>>>>    to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY
>>>>    2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO
>>>>    Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other
>>>>    is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning
>>>>    meeting had indicated that this might take place in January
>>>>    2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken
>>>>    place in January or February, staff would like to know if you
>>>>    believe it will be _preferable for these two meetings to take
>>>>    place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the
>>>>    space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it
>>>>    will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking
>>>>    place at different times in the year_.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for
>>>>    face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June
>>>>    2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel
>>>>    now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the
>>>>    GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval
>>>>    requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los
>>>>    Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently
>>>>    in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that
>>>>    the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    We understand that, as these events are going to take place in
>>>>    calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the
>>>>    Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming
>>>>    concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the
>>>>    NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning
>>>>    purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as
>>>>    possible from those community members who may be most affected
>>>>    by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide
>>>>    us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    Thanks and cheers
>>>> 
>>>>    Mary
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    _______________________________________________
>>>    NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>    NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is> <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>>    https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>>    <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170730/8932ab2c/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Mon Jul 31 13:17:47 2017
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 06:17:47 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Suggested Comment: Draft Framework for
	Registry Operators to Respond to Security Threats
In-Reply-To: <E1dbwdr-0005N3-F2@rmmprod06.runbox>
References: <E1dbwdr-0005N3-F2@rmmprod06.runbox>
Message-ID: <viDG_GKZm4MGicRFTne3yEZERwqRoqEYGvaYOBiMDIBmcXZpK3WOzB89GoIPEZ-HorUP_hvNPo6oJg4a9RcFT5qyvmWxwgkO61QEWNen_l4=@ferdeline.com>

I believe the PC is being asked to review this comment which has been drafted by Dina and Juan. The submission deadline for comments on this issue is today, but I suspect we will not be able to meet that, so let's try for this Friday? I think we need to bring in a topic expert, James Gannon (cc'd), to get his opinion on this comment, too -- because I am happy to raise my hand and say I do not know anything about this topic.

Best, Ayden

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Suggested Comment: Draft Framework for Registry Operators to Respond to Security Threats
> Local Time: July 30, 2017 11:24 PM
> UTC Time: July 30, 2017 10:24 PM
> From: thomascovenant at thomascovenant.org
> To: NCUC-discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
> Hello,
> the comment proposal is underneath, what are your thoughts?
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TfgHuMqzD660_CHLQMXMW4phnBtLSP94j6X5riY2Ko4/edit
> Note from Security Framework Drafting Team wiki workspace:
> - Is Public Comment required for the draft Framework?
> - This is not a policy implementation nor a contractual requirements document; therefore, a public comment proceeding would not be required. However, SFDT has decided to conduct a public comment for broader community feedback prior to finalization of the Framework.
> Main points:
> - Framework should be expanded
> - Several minor details are to be clarified, restructuring proposal
> - as a small step in response to proposed detailed report examination, I suggest we include a recommendation on Responsible Threat Disclosure.
> Finally, I quote Point 3 from the Comment:
> "Since the following examination of threat report is identified in the Framework, we strongly suggest including a recommendation on Responsible Threat Disclosure to be included in the document:
> "Each RO should scrutinize, question or otherwise inquire about the legitimacy of the origin
> of a request, in accordance with their own internal policies and processes."
> We have seen a broad variation in handling security threat reports, varying from constructive actions addressing the issues to punishment of the reporting party. Benefits of responsible threat submission are obvious.
> In this context, it is important to underline benefits and importance of responsible threat disclosure. We request recommendation to extend goodwill and not cause harm to the reporting party whenever possible:
> When applicable, RO should provide:
> - an easy way to report security threats and violation
> - encrypted ways of communication
> - option of anonymous submission"
> Other:
> - This is my first comment drafted with input from Juan Manuel Rojas (thank you for commenting). Access to shared document and request for review was given to those who expressed interest in working on it. All input from the list is very welcome. Please let me know what needs to be corrected and I will promptly do it.
> - Comment is a bit late, I will request an extra week to discuss the proposal with my humble excuses.
> BR,
> Dina Solveig Jalkanen
> --
> * * *
> Friendly geek in Amsterdam, FSFE Fellow
> https://wiki.techinc.nl/index.php/User:Thomascovenant
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170731/84499afc/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Mon Jul 31 13:33:59 2017
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 19:33:59 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Suggested Comment: Draft Framework
 for Registry Operators to Respond to Security Threats
In-Reply-To: <viDG_GKZm4MGicRFTne3yEZERwqRoqEYGvaYOBiMDIBmcXZpK3WOzB89GoIPEZ-HorUP_hvNPo6oJg4a9RcFT5qyvmWxwgkO61QEWNen_l4=@ferdeline.com>
References: <E1dbwdr-0005N3-F2@rmmprod06.runbox>
 <viDG_GKZm4MGicRFTne3yEZERwqRoqEYGvaYOBiMDIBmcXZpK3WOzB89GoIPEZ-HorUP_hvNPo6oJg4a9RcFT5qyvmWxwgkO61QEWNen_l4=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThktSm3qRv-1UH9sOEH0R4j4G4aev73XYTE70Zvn9OgSpw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ayden,

Yes it is for PC review. We worked on it the last days with Juan, Dina and
Niels. James cannot response since is off for the coming days. I was going
to send email to related ICANN staff to inform that we will make a late
submission, hopefully by end of this week.

Best,

Rafik


On Jul 31, 2017 7:18 PM, "Ayden F?rdeline" <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:

I believe the PC is being asked to review this comment which has been
drafted by Dina and Juan. The submission deadline for comments on this
issue is today, but I suspect we will not be able to meet that, so let's
try for this Friday? I think we need to bring in a topic expert, James
Gannon (cc'd), to get his opinion on this comment, too -- because I am
happy to raise my hand and say I do not know anything about this topic.

Best, Ayden


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Suggested Comment: Draft Framework for Registry
Operators to Respond to Security Threats
Local Time: July 30, 2017 11:24 PM
UTC Time: July 30, 2017 10:24 PM
From: thomascovenant at thomascovenant.org
To: NCUC-discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>

Hello,

the comment proposal is underneath, what are your thoughts?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TfgHuMqzD660_
CHLQMXMW4phnBtLSP94j6X5riY2Ko4/edit

Note from Security Framework Drafting Team wiki workspace:

- Is Public Comment required for the draft Framework?
- This is not a policy implementation nor a contractual requirements
document; therefore, a public comment proceeding would not be required.
However, SFDT has decided to conduct a public comment for broader community
feedback prior to finalization of the Framework.

Main points:

- Framework should be expanded
- Several minor details are to be clarified, restructuring proposal
- as a small step in response to proposed detailed report examination, I
suggest we include a recommendation on Responsible Threat Disclosure.

Finally, I quote Point 3 from the Comment:

"Since the following examination of threat report is identified in the
Framework, we strongly suggest including a recommendation on Responsible
Threat Disclosure to be included in the document:

"Each RO should scrutinize, question or otherwise inquire about the
legitimacy of the origin
of a request, in accordance with their own internal policies and processes."

We have seen a broad variation in handling security threat reports, varying
from constructive actions addressing the issues to punishment of the
reporting party. Benefits of responsible threat submission are obvious.

In this context, it is important to underline benefits and importance of
responsible threat disclosure. We request recommendation to extend goodwill
and not cause harm to the reporting party whenever possible:

When applicable, RO should provide:

- an easy way to report security threats and violation
- encrypted ways of communication
- option of anonymous submission"

Other:

- This is my first comment drafted with input from Juan Manuel Rojas (thank
you for commenting). Access to shared document and request for review was
given to those who expressed interest in working on it. All input from the
list is very welcome. Please let me know what needs to be corrected and I
will promptly do it.
- Comment is a bit late, I will request an extra week to discuss the
proposal with my humble excuses.

BR,
Dina Solveig Jalkanen
-- 
* * *
Friendly geek in Amsterdam, FSFE Fellow
https://wiki.techinc.nl/index.php/User:Thomascovenant


_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss



_______________________________________________
NCSG-PC mailing list
NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170731/ec6315cd/attachment.htm>

From pileleji at ymca.gm  Mon Jul 31 13:43:17 2017
From: pileleji at ymca.gm (Poncelet Ileleji)
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:43:17 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEux40viao=kRcE--O_nQ0Ed7FA++937p30MGC3VAUsj2B6sPA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Rafik,

I total hear your point on this together with other colleagues too, the
intersessional has  benefits though.  Anyway for me, as long as its in the
USA as of now, I will not support for an intersessional to be in the USA at
this time,  and I have made my point known to NPOC.  Anyway for me for such
meetings I support use of one venue, Iceland was good and logistical too
the venue too was spot on for the majority.  So my point do we have to be
changing venues all the time? Why change what has worked and got good
reviews in all aspects?  So if we should have  two meetings in one  I
suggest Iceland as a very appropriate venue.  Just my one cent to this
discuss.

Poncelet

On 28 July 2017 at 22:30, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another
> intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review and
> trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would make
> sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning meeting. that
> means 1 travel less for councilors at least.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
>
>> Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
>>
>> I think the two meetings should be held separately at different times of
>> the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to different audiences
>> [with some overlap].
>>
>> I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business hours,
>> but some of our participants might find it easier to be able to travel to a
>> meeting over a weekend and to have the meeting commence on a Sunday. I am
>> not sure what others think about this suggestion, particularly those on the
>> GNSO Council who would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out
>> there...
>>
>> For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense to me to
>> have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN office for the
>> majority of the likely participants.
>>
>> For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I
>> understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los Angeles makes a
>> lot of sense, though I understand the participant profiles vary, and it may
>> be very difficult for many of the Intersessional participants to travel to
>> the United States. Based on the participant profiles of everyone who
>> attended the Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much
>> easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or Canadian
>> visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many in Latin America,
>> Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair]. It would also be a rather
>> economical choice.
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
>> Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
>> Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
>> UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
>> From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>> To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>
>>
>> Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well, just
>> forwarding....
>>
>> Stephanie
>>
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject:
>> YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO
>> Council strategic planning sessions
>> Date:
>> Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
>> From:
>> Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> <mary.wong at icann.org>
>> To:
>> Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> <psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Susan Kawaguchi
>> <susankpolicy at gmail.com> <susankpolicy at gmail.com>, Heather Forrest
>> <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, icannlists
>> <icannlists at winston.com> <icannlists at winston.com>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
>> <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de> <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>,
>> Anthony Harris <anthonyrharris at gmail.com> <anthonyrharris at gmail.com>,
>> Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, Milan,
>> Stefania <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu> <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>, Marilia Maciel
>> <mariliamaciel at gmail.com> <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>, Stephanie Perrin
>> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>,
>> Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
>> <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com>
>> <julf at julf.com>
>> CC:
>> Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org> <benedetta.rossi at icann.org>
>>
>>
>> Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik, Tony,
>> Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin working with
>> the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership to plan two
>> face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY 2018. One is a 2-3 day
>> strategic planning session for the GNSO Council (approved as a pilot
>> project for FY2018), and the other is the periodic NCPH Intersessional
>> meeting.
>>
>>
>>
>> As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning meeting had
>> indicated that this might take place in January 2018, and as the NCPH
>> Intersessional has traditionally taken place in January or February, staff
>> would like to know if you believe it will be *preferable for these two
>> meetings to take place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur
>> within the space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it
>> will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking place at
>> different times in the year*.
>>
>>
>>
>> You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for face-to-face
>> meeting planning has been updated (as of June 2017), such that meeting
>> requests for location, dates and travel now have to be sent in several
>> months ahead of time. For the GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the
>> budget approval requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los
>> Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently in the
>> same week is better, this will most probably mean that the NCPH
>> Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
>>
>>
>>
>> We understand that, as these events are going to take place in calendar
>> year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the Council by that time. In
>> addition, decisions and programming concerning the NCPH Intersessional is
>> the responsibility of the NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council.
>> However, for planning purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much
>> input as possible from those community members who may be most affected by
>> the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide us with your
>> opinion as to which option is preferred.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks and cheers
>>
>> Mary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>


-- 
Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
Coordinator
The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
MDI Road Kanifing South
P. O. Box 421 Banjul
The Gambia, West Africa
Tel: (220) 4370240
Fax:(220) 4390793
Cell:(220) 9912508
Skype: pons_utd






*www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm>http://jokkolabs.net/en/
<http://jokkolabs.net/en/>www.waigf.org
<http://www.waigf.org>www,insistglobal.com <http://www.itag.gm>www.npoc.org
<http://www.npoc.org>http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753
<http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753>*www.diplointernetgovernance.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170731/92ad4b0d/attachment.htm>

From pileleji at ymca.gm  Mon Jul 31 13:44:06 2017
From: pileleji at ymca.gm (Poncelet Ileleji)
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:44:06 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: []council to finalise updated GNSO Review of the
 GAC Communique
In-Reply-To: <3fceb282-56b1-bf9c-b26b-6b48299a247e@apc.org>
References: <CAH5sThnUYCVT-CQT=n2PnzRUkZfSSd49cYXN8SH9cnP0yfzCzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <3fceb282-56b1-bf9c-b26b-6b48299a247e@apc.org>
Message-ID: <CAEux40vVH+0eTPtCtkCBoxLWGnOiyLavJREw8HxJ=zSsW5Y8_Q@mail.gmail.com>

+1 Avri,

Total concur with your view point on this one.

Kind Regards

Poncelet

On 29 July 2017 at 17:05, avri doria <avri at apc.org> wrote:

> (observer)
>
> Hi,
>
> on the geo-names issue:
>
> I wonder why mention a ccnso pdp - that seems to be tempting the bears.
>
> I would remove  "rather than initiate a ccNSO PDP on country and
> territory names at the top-level"
>
> Otherwise i do not see the problem.
>
> avri
>
> On 27-Jul-17 20:28, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> > hi all,
> >
> > the discussion about the text for geonames in GNSO response is
> > ongoing. we should agree on what can be acceptable for NCSG.
> > @Avri any thought on this? is the new text helpful for the subsequent
> > procedures WG?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Rafik
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: *Austin, Donna via council* <council at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> > Date: 2017-07-28 0:11 GMT+09:00
> > Subject: Re: [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the
> > GAC Communique
> > To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com
> > <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>>, GNSO Council List
> > <council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> > Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>"
> > <gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>>, Jeff Neuman
> > <jeff.neuman at valideus.com <mailto:jeff.neuman at valideus.com>>
> >
> >
> > Heather, All
> >
> >
> >
> > During an RySG call yesterday there was considerable discussion about
> > the merits of each of the proposed options relating to the geographic
> > names.
> >
> >
> >
> > I understand (and sincerely apologise) this request is late in the
> > day; however, the RySG has requested that consideration be given to a
> > potential third option that would serve to replace both Option A and
> > Option B. As you will see, this third option contains the main
> > elements of both Option A and B, and also addresses the comment from
> > Paul McGrady that the response call out the community discussions in
> > Johannesburg:
> >
> >
> >
> > /The GNSO Council also takes note of the ?Geographic Names as
> > Top-Level Domains? section of the communiqu? restating previous advice
> > and positions. Among those positions are references that imply that
> > certain geographic top-level domains should be addressed by, and only
> > through, a ccNSO PDP. With respect to that position we note that
> > rather than initiative a ccNSO PDP on country and territory names at
> > the top-level, the ccNSO established a Cross Community Working Group
> > on the Use of Country and Territory Names (CCWG UCTN) that was jointly
> > chartered by the ccNSO and GNSO. The CCWG UCTN recently produced a
> > final report, but was unable to provide recommendations on the use of
> > country and territory names as TLDs, beyond the use of two-characters.
> > The GNSO strongly believes that these issues are currently within the
> > scope and charter of the GNSO Policy Development Process on New gTLD
> > Subsequent Procedures (SubPro PDP). As a result of the recent Cross
> > Community Discussions on geographic names conducted at ICANN 59, the
> > SubPro PDP is establishing a new Work Track 5 on Geographic Names at
> > the Top Level and inviting representatives from each of the SOs and
> > ACs to form a Leadership Team for that Work Track. The GNSO Council
> > encourages participation from the community, including the GAC, in
> > that SubPro PDP to ensure a multi-stakeholder bottom up solution to
> > this issue./
> >
> > / /
> >
> > /This approach is consistent with the GAC?s position also contained in
> > the ?Geographic Names as Top-Level Domains? section of the communiqu?
> > ? ? that any further process of policy review and development should:
> > (a) continue to allow all stakeholder groups to participate equally;
> > (b) take into account the history and rationale of the arrangements
> > currently in place; and (c) apply an evidence-based policy approach to
> > any proposals for future arrangements.?/
> >
> >
> >
> > As Rubens has already noted on the Council list, the respective
> > authors of Options A and B both recognize potential shortcomings of
> > their suggested text and to that end both Rubens and Jeff both support
> > the proposed amendment.
> >
> > Thank you for considering this late amendment, which serves to replace
> > both Option A and Option B.
> >
> >
> >
> > Donna
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:*council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>
> > [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Heather Forrest
> > *Sent:* Monday, July 24, 2017 5:54 AM
> > *To:* GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> > *Cc:* gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>
> > *Subject:* [council] DOODLE to finalise updated GNSO Review of the GAC
> > Communique
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Council colleagues,
> >
> >
> >
> > We have reached a point of near finalization of the GNSO Response to
> > the GAC Johannesburg Communique. The one outstanding item amongst the
> > members of the revision team is the text relating to geographic names.
> > You'll see this text in the attached draft as Option A and Option B.
> >
> >
> >
> > For our input to reach the Board in time for its meeting with the GAC
> > in the week of 14 August, we cannot push this out to the next Council
> > meeting in late August. For our response to be timely and effective,
> > we need a Communique Response that we can agree on in full before it
> > goes to electronic vote.
> >
> >
> >
> > We had scheduled an electronic Council vote to open this Thursday, but
> > we don't yet have a final text to vote on. Hence I propose we delay
> > the electronic vote to open next Monday to give us all time to
> > consider and take instructions (if appropriate) on Option A and B.
> >
> >
> >
> > To help us get to final, votable text, please could you review the
> > attached and complete the Doodle to express support for either Option
> > A or B on geo names.
> >
> >
> > *Doodle:* https://icannorg.doodle.com/poll/yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t
> > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__icannorg.doodle.com_poll_yqdx3g5gdfi5uz2t&d=DwMFaQ&c=
> MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=
> YCVgcMubkaHFRHLFtfeKImXTW8Nipr07HJGcexh2XrE&s=
> kIS8BXv4sOul3g4opzWC6lqtvhe6Vhm1XpK9VFYJwZM&e=>
> >
> >
> >
> > *Timeline*:
> >
> > ?Monday, 24 July: Doodle (to select Option A or B on geo names text)
> opens
> >
> > ?Friday, 28 July: Doodle closes
> >
> > ?Monday, 31 July: Electronic vote on Council motion approving the GNSO
> > Response to GAC Joburg Communique (including preferred Option A or B)
> > opens
> >
> > ?Friday, 4 August: Electronic vote closes
> >
> > ?Monday, 7 August: GNSO Response to GAC Communique transmitted to Board
> >
> >
> >
> > Many thanks to Marika and the Secretariat team for helping to
> > coordinate both the Doodle and e-vote in such a tight timeframe. Also
> > noting that James and Donna are both away today, so I'm on point to
> > shepherd this through.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best wishes to all,
> >
> >
> >
> > Heather
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > council mailing list
> > council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
> > <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>



-- 
Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
Coordinator
The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
MDI Road Kanifing South
P. O. Box 421 Banjul
The Gambia, West Africa
Tel: (220) 4370240
Fax:(220) 4390793
Cell:(220) 9912508
Skype: pons_utd






*www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm>http://jokkolabs.net/en/
<http://jokkolabs.net/en/>www.waigf.org
<http://www.waigf.org>www,insistglobal.com <http://www.itag.gm>www.npoc.org
<http://www.npoc.org>http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753
<http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753>*www.diplointernetgovernance.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170731/dfe35eb3/attachment.htm>

From ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info  Sun Jul 30 18:58:36 2017
From: ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2017 18:58:36 +0300
Subject: [NCSG-PC] YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH
 Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
In-Reply-To: <AA0A2B79-A19A-42CA-B70D-21128800812F@gmail.com>
References: <BD7D18AC-6881-4F5B-98D6-34BEA76816E8@icann.org>
 <87ae5419-3629-928c-6c78-2cf887b370f9@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <ZT8NmZ-0eSANsNNmGxQMjbI1MiOPBqSszdyJgMSyZXtYqADRWrs4aorUuEk0oA9C9Yxawlbj5IGpO_j3P8pQOTYhrjI1P2o4CScaDRSxIgA=@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=nTotJk5k8bKSpceyQTkXjS6wAazpf5p_ikhadRUvoFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <29049bda-cb7a-f07a-c3d8-1d7942f6cbe0@mail.utoronto.ca>
 <50689cd9-39be-eb87-8d8e-0e8b83e167fa@apc.org>
 <AA0A2B79-A19A-42CA-B70D-21128800812F@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20170730155836.ow6wy27fqgks2xgb@tarvainen.info>

Dear all,

I tend to agree with Bill and Avri. As an observation, as far as I can
remember almost(?) all participants in all intersessionals have been
at least fairly satisfied with them and found them useful. Perhaps? the
positive outcomes have not been communicated well to others, or
perhaps at least to some extent tey are such that cannot be well
communicated, as in forming personal contacts and improving
understanding of the other side.

So I think intersessionals are useful enough to continue, and while I
appreciate the concerns of overloading people, Bill's suggestion of
spreading the load is good: the more people we get involved, the
better.

And with that in mind, Ayden's argument against combining intersessional
with other meetings makes a lot of sense. I don't have a strong opinion
on that, though - sometimes it might work very well, sometimes less so.

I share the concerns about time and effort needed to prepare, however,
and perhaps making them biannual or alternating them with something
different (like a similar meeting with RrSG/RySG every other year)
might be worth considering.

As for location, visa-unfriendliness is a big concern. In particular
USA has been problematic, every time I've been involved at least one
of our would-be travellers has been unable to make it because of visa
issues (unless I've forgotten something, in Reykjavik the only one who
could not make it because of visa issues was Farzaneh, and that was
due to US regulations, not Iceland's). And we knew in advance some
people would not have been able to go to Istanbul either. Of course no
location is perfect, I don't see any place that could guarantee
everybody will get in, but visa-friendliness should definitely
weigh heavily on location choice.

On the other hand ICANN hubs are convenient and economical and
generally offer better access to staff as well.

On the third hand, varying location is at least potentially better
for outreach purposes. I would not put much weight on that though,
it's not the main reason of intersessionals, but a small consideration
nonetheless.

And of course post-meeting tourism potential should be irrelevant in
location selection - though I do encourage people to do post-meeting
tourism whenever possible, after all it's just about only genuinely
free perk in these trips (free in the sense of costing ICANN nothing).

Finally, considering 2018 in particular, even though I personally
don't plan to be there, I think combining it with the Council
Strategic Session makes a lot of sense.

Tapani


On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 10:01:07AM +0900, William Drake (wjdrake at gmail.com) wrote:
> 
> (also observer)
> 
> +1 I thought the two meetings I participated in when chair were useful in terms of relational bridge building, clearly identifying areas of agreement/disagreement/possible joint actions between NCSG/CSG, and thinking about the NCPH trajectory in general in light of the evolution due to the new gTLDs.  At one of them, we also managed to do a very good outreach session which ultimately helped encourage important CSOs to join.  If the argument is that some folks e.g. Councilors feel too tapped out to attend, then send other members who are available and interested, as long as there?s preparation and a clear mandate and any actual decisions come back to the general membership and ?leadership? bodies for vetting before action I don?t see the problem.  Could help with onboarding into WG work etc. too. Proximity to an office for logistics, not wandering the earth in search of post-meeting tourism.
> 
> Bill
> 
> > On Jul 30, 2017, at 02:01, avri doria <avri at apc.org> wrote:
> > 
> > (observer)
> > 
> > I think that the annual conversation between CSG et al and NCSG et al,
> > is a good thing and an important thing. I think it also should be
> > coordinated with staff contacts so that both CSG and NCSG can hear the
> > same things.
> > 
> > I think the GNSO council et al spending some time in retreat is also
> > important for building a council that can sustain working together. It
> > can't happen at the full meetings, so makes sense that it happen outside
> > that.  I think this should also be don with staff access.
> > 
> > I think all of these meetings are best done in proximity to an ICANN
> > office and offset from the 3 main meetings.
> > 
> > The meetings need planning and focus, but I do not believe it wise to
> > let them drop.
> > 
> > avri
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 28-Jul-17 18:48, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
> >> 
> >> I am not enthusiastic about more meetings either.  And I am not keen
> >> on travelling to the US.....Los Angeles takes way longer than Iceland,
> >> for me, with way more hassle.  I have never been to Mexico, so I dont
> >> know how hard that is.  Am indifferent about putting the two meetings
> >> together, makes sense not to fly twice.
> >> 
> >> cheers SP
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On 2017-07-28 18:30, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> 
> >>> I am among those who are not really supporting holding another
> >>> intersessional meeting next year. We are not doing any serious review
> >>> and trying to improve it but just carrying on because we got a budget.
> >>> if the interesessional will be organized anyway, I think it would
> >>> make sense to hold it in the same week with the Council planning
> >>> meeting. that means 1 travel less for councilors at least. 
> >>> 
> >>> Best,
> >>> 
> >>> Rafik
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 2017-07-28 19:57 GMT+09:00 Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
> >>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>>:
> >>> 
> >>>    Thanks for sharing this, Stephanie, and for inviting our feedback.
> >>> 
> >>>    I think the two meetings should be held separately at different
> >>>    times of the year, as they serve different purposes and cater to
> >>>    different audiences [with some overlap].
> >>> 
> >>>    I understand that ICANN staff try only to travel during business
> >>>    hours, but some of our participants might find it easier to be
> >>>    able to travel to a meeting over a weekend and to have the
> >>>    meeting commence on a Sunday. I am not sure what others think
> >>>    about this suggestion, particularly those on the GNSO Council who
> >>>    would be impacted here, but just putting that idea out there...
> >>> 
> >>>    For the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Meeting, it makes sense
> >>>    to me to have this in Los Angeles given it is the closest ICANN
> >>>    office for the majority of the likely participants.
> >>> 
> >>>    For the Intersessional (which I think should continue, though I
> >>>    understand that is not a view held by all) I also think Los
> >>>    Angeles makes a lot of sense, though I understand the participant
> >>>    profiles vary, and it may be very difficult for many of the
> >>>    Intersessional participants to travel to the United States. Based
> >>>    on the participant profiles of everyone who attended the
> >>>    Intersessional this year, I believe Mexico City would be much
> >>>    easier for everyone to travel to [anyone with an existing US or
> >>>    Canadian visa does not need a visa to enter Mexico, and for many
> >>>    in Latin America, Mexico?s immigration policies are very fair].
> >>>    It would also be a rather economical choice.
> >>> 
> >>>    Best wishes, Ayden F?rdeline 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>>    -------- Original Message --------
> >>>>    Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for
> >>>>    2018 NCPH Intersessional & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
> >>>>    Local Time: July 27, 2017 9:37 PM
> >>>>    UTC Time: July 27, 2017 8:37 PM
> >>>>    From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
> >>>>    <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>
> >>>>    To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>>
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>    Perhaps we ought to discuss this on the broader list as well,
> >>>>    just forwarding....
> >>>> 
> >>>>    Stephanie
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>    -------- Forwarded Message --------
> >>>>    Subject:
> >>>>    	YOUR FEEDBACK REQUESTED: Planning for 2018 NCPH Intersessional
> >>>>    & GNSO Council strategic planning sessions
> >>>>    Date:
> >>>>    	Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:22:29 +0000
> >>>>    From:
> >>>>    	Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>> <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>>
> >>>>    To:
> >>>>    	Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>> <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>>, Susan
> >>>>    Kawaguchi <susankpolicy at gmail.com <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com>>
> >>>>    <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com <mailto:susankpolicy at gmail.com>>, Heather Forrest
> >>>>    <haforrestesq at gmail.com <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>> <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com <mailto:haforrestesq at gmail.com>>,
> >>>>    icannlists <icannlists at winston.com <mailto:icannlists at winston.com>>
> >>>>    <mailto:icannlists at winston.com <mailto:icannlists at winston.com>>, Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben
> >>>>    <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>>
> >>>>    <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>>, Anthony Harris
> >>>>    <anthonyrharris at gmail.com <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com>> <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com <mailto:anthonyrharris at gmail.com>>,
> >>>>    Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>
> >>>>    <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>, Milan, Stefania
> >>>>    <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu <mailto:Stefania.Milan at eui.eu>> <mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu <mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>>, Marilia
> >>>>    Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>>
> >>>>    <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>>, Stephanie Perrin
> >>>>    <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>
> >>>>    <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>, Martin Pablo Silva
> >>>>    Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>>
> >>>>    <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com <mailto:mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>>, Johan Helsingius
> >>>>    <julf at julf.com <mailto:julf at julf.com>> <mailto:julf at julf.com <mailto:julf at julf.com>>
> >>>>    CC:
> >>>>    	Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org>>
> >>>>    <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org <mailto:benedetta.rossi at icann.org>>
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>    Dear Heather, Susan, Marilia, Stefania, Stephanie, Phil, Rafik,
> >>>>    Tony, Julf, Wolf-Ulrich, Paul and Martin,
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>    I am writing to seek your input as we (ICANN staff) begin
> >>>>    working with the GNSO Council leadership and the NCPH leadership
> >>>>    to plan two face-to-face meetings that have been approved for FY
> >>>>    2018. One is a 2-3 day strategic planning session for the GNSO
> >>>>    Council (approved as a pilot project for FY2018), and the other
> >>>>    is the periodic NCPH Intersessional meeting.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>    As the application for the GNSO Council?s strategic planning
> >>>>    meeting had indicated that this might take place in January
> >>>>    2018, and as the NCPH Intersessional has traditionally taken
> >>>>    place in January or February, staff would like to know if you
> >>>>    believe it will be _preferable for these two meetings to take
> >>>>    place concurrently, such that both meetings can occur within the
> >>>>    space of a single week in the same location, or if you think it
> >>>>    will be better to plan them as two separate meetings taking
> >>>>    place at different times in the year_.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>    You may be interested to know that the ICANN process for
> >>>>    face-to-face meeting planning has been updated (as of June
> >>>>    2017), such that meeting requests for location, dates and travel
> >>>>    now have to be sent in several months ahead of time. For the
> >>>>    GNSO Council strategic planning meeting, the budget approval
> >>>>    requires an ICANN office location, with preference for Los
> >>>>    Angeles ? hence, if you think running both meetings concurrently
> >>>>    in the same week is better, this will most probably mean that
> >>>>    the NCPH Intersessional will take place in Los Angeles as well.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>    We understand that, as these events are going to take place in
> >>>>    calendar year 2018, several of you may no longer be on the
> >>>>    Council by that time. In addition, decisions and programming
> >>>>    concerning the NCPH Intersessional is the responsibility of the
> >>>>    NCPH leadership and not the GNSO Council. However, for planning
> >>>>    purposes we thought it appropriate to seek as much input as
> >>>>    possible from those community members who may be most affected
> >>>>    by the dates and timing, and so we hope you are able to provide
> >>>>    us with your opinion as to which option is preferred.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>    Thanks and cheers
> >>>> 
> >>>>    Mary