From stephanie.perrin  Wed Sep  5 01:13:33 2018
From: stephanie.perrin (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 18:13:33 -0400
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Registration Directory Service
 (RDS)-WHOIS2 Draft Report Published for Public Comment
In-Reply-To: <B1E44901-4E7E-48C7-B797-C204C894AD87@icann.org>
References: <B1E44901-4E7E-48C7-B797-C204C894AD87@icann.org>
Message-ID: <2c318c85-f055-fcb6-1e69-141b39043942@mail.utoronto.ca>

We have lots of time to comment on this report, but I do urge you to 
read it.

Stephanie



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Registration Directory Service (RDS)-WHOIS2 
Draft Report Published for Public Comment
Date: 	Tue, 4 Sep 2018 22:05:43 +0000
From: 	Jean-Baptiste Deroulez <jean-baptiste.deroulez at icann.org>
To: 	Cathrin Bauer via RDS-WHOIS2-RT <rds-whois2-rt at icann.org>



Dear review team members,

Congratulations, we are pleased to let you know that the *Registration 
Directory Service (RDS)-WHOIS2 Draft Report*?was published for public 
comment:

  * Announcement?: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2018-09-04-en
  * Public comment page:
    https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rds-whois2-review-2018-09-04-en

The Executive Summary will be translated in the 5 UN languages, 
translations will be available on Friday 7 September.

Community will have the opportunity to submit their input until 4 
November 2018, either via email or using the suggested template 
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-rds-whois2-review-comment-input-form-31aug18-en.pdf> 
available on the public comments page.

A webinar will be scheduled for 17 September 2018 at 15:00 UTC and 21:00 
UTC for the review team to present its Draft Report. Participants will 
have the opportunity to provide feedback and ask questions directly to 
the review team. Two calendar invitations were sent earlier today to the 
review team for each session.

At ICANN63, review team members attending the meeting will update and 
seek Community?s input on the Draft Report at the Engagement Session, 
and during any potential discussions that will be scheduled with 
community stakeholder groups.

We kindly invite you to spread the word.

Kind regards,

Jean-Baptiste

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20180904/831071e4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list
RDS-WHOIS2-RT at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt


From rafik.dammak  Wed Sep  5 02:47:51 2018
From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 08:47:51 +0900
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Registration Directory Service
 (RDS)-WHOIS2 Draft Report Published for Public Comment
In-Reply-To: <2c318c85-f055-fcb6-1e69-141b39043942@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <B1E44901-4E7E-48C7-B797-C204C894AD87@icann.org>
	<2c318c85-f055-fcb6-1e69-141b39043942@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=NNAgF-5+r-H-CBcZ6u2DN-eZqRznVNB1mDAoEL0sJsg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Stephanie,

thanks, I will send a call for volunteers as usual to NCSG list, but this
comment is among those which needs people involved on whois matters to
participate or support volunteers for drafting.

Best,

Rafik



Le mer. 5 sept. 2018 ? 07:13, Stephanie Perrin <
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> a ?crit :

> We have lots of time to comment on this report, but I do urge you to read
> it.
>
> Stephanie
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Registration Directory Service (RDS)-WHOIS2
> Draft Report Published for Public Comment
> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 22:05:43 +0000
> From: Jean-Baptiste Deroulez <jean-baptiste.deroulez at icann.org>
> <jean-baptiste.deroulez at icann.org>
> To: Cathrin Bauer via RDS-WHOIS2-RT <rds-whois2-rt at icann.org>
> <rds-whois2-rt at icann.org>
>
> Dear review team members,
>
>
>
> Congratulations, we are pleased to let you know that the *Registration
> Directory Service (RDS)-WHOIS2 Draft Report* was published for public
> comment:
>
>    - Announcement : https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2018-09-04-en
>    - Public comment page:
>    https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rds-whois2-review-2018-09-04-en
>
>
>
> The Executive Summary will be translated in the 5 UN languages,
> translations will be available on Friday 7 September.
>
>
>
> Community will have the opportunity to submit their input until 4 November
> 2018, either via email or using the suggested template
> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-rds-whois2-review-comment-input-form-31aug18-en.pdf>
> available on the public comments page.
>
>
>
> A webinar will be scheduled for 17 September 2018 at 15:00 UTC and 21:00
> UTC for the review team to present its Draft Report. Participants will have
> the opportunity to provide feedback and ask questions directly to the
> review team. Two calendar invitations were sent earlier today to the review
> team for each session.
>
>
>
> At ICANN63, review team members attending the meeting will update and
> seek Community?s input on the Draft Report at the Engagement Session, and
> during any potential discussions that will be scheduled with community
> stakeholder groups.
>
>
>
> We kindly invite you to spread the word.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Jean-Baptiste
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20180905/2d347bb7/attachment-0001.html>


From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com  Sat Sep  1 01:08:18 2018
From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii)
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 18:08:18 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Intersessional
In-Reply-To: <CADxLtgc+W90tOsSZt6Z08bnCMBjJyDcEPus_Gm+iM04L-TbZzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAN1qJvCqocycwCqB-kb3Rb6-0_FE90zv3wr_6YQ=pEc8=k23Uw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThn5W+ehY62QpEdu4pE1mvQddSPv7Vtg-puO3w=c4DDVEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FEE410A3-C597-415C-A999-F0860658B32B@ferdeline.com>
 <CADxLtgc+W90tOsSZt6Z08bnCMBjJyDcEPus_Gm+iM04L-TbZzg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN1qJvBnT3h+20K34QjVJCuYZh1i35S0PYzPX1GbYHNRdKK_wA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi

IPC announced it is against holding intersessional in 2019.


Farzaneh


On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 7:16 AM Tatiana Tropina <tatiana.tropina at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I am not sure how holding intersessional in 2019 would save us from the
> possible cuts in 2020 as it would be a new fiscal year - if they would want
> to cut it, they would cut it no matter what and will have more reasons to
> do so if 2019 would have the same "productivity" as years before.
> Cheers,
> Tanya
>
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 13:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>
>> I think it is important to remember that the Intersessional is currently
>> a part of the core budget; if we reject the opportunity now, there is no
>> guarantees that the line item will return in the budget for FY20. I think
>> it would be something ICANN org would seek to cut out, reasoning, if we did
>> not need it in FY19, why would we need it in FY20? I think it would be very
>> regrettable if this happened.
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>
>> On 31 Aug 2018, at 06:18, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks, Farzaneh.
>> I expressed my opinion before as we should hold the intersessional in
>> 2020 if we want really to change it. I heard carefully to the arguments
>> made but I am still convinced that doesn't make sense to have it in 2019
>> while we may sense a lukewarm position in the other side too.
>> I don't think you should withdraw from deliberations. You are still a
>> member of PC and you got to participate till the end of your term.
>> committee work doesn't stop for few weeks and it is a continuity.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>> Le ven. 31 ao?t 2018 ? 12:22, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> a ?crit :
>>
>>> NCPH is being asked again by Mary to hold intersessional in 2019 or not.
>>> BC already has said no and hold it in 2020, the CSG EC and others have not
>>> responded. There was some decision from NCUC EC not to have it in 2019 but
>>> hold it in (2020) but that is because I had the impression that this issue
>>> was resolved and this was also NCSG decision but seems like Arsene, Ayden
>>> and Stephanie are in favor of holding it in 2019 as well (all happened on
>>> the NCUC mailing list).
>>>
>>> You need to have a discussion here, perhaps on NCSG mailing list and
>>> tell Mary the decision. We can just say we are undecided. I cannot hold off
>>> the decision until Stephanie becomes chair because Mary needs to know now.
>>> I suggest you also tell NPOC and NCUC that you are revisiting the issue to
>>> see if they change their mind.
>>>
>>> Since I think it was implied that I should not decide since I am
>>> outgoing (despite having discussed this in Feb and there were no comments
>>> on it), I have decided not to engage with this discussion and leave it to
>>> you.
>>>
>>> Just let me know. If I don't hear anything or there is no decision by
>>> Wednesday next week I will let Mary know that NCSG is undecided.
>>>
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20180831/0d1aa316/attachment.htm>

From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com  Sat Sep  1 20:38:24 2018
From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii)
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2018 13:38:24 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Intersessional
In-Reply-To: <CAN1qJvBnT3h+20K34QjVJCuYZh1i35S0PYzPX1GbYHNRdKK_wA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAN1qJvCqocycwCqB-kb3Rb6-0_FE90zv3wr_6YQ=pEc8=k23Uw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThn5W+ehY62QpEdu4pE1mvQddSPv7Vtg-puO3w=c4DDVEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FEE410A3-C597-415C-A999-F0860658B32B@ferdeline.com>
 <CADxLtgc+W90tOsSZt6Z08bnCMBjJyDcEPus_Gm+iM04L-TbZzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvBnT3h+20K34QjVJCuYZh1i35S0PYzPX1GbYHNRdKK_wA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN1qJvCCFRaGPwT5yWGQCUv3xcSEpejqzXHNJs17xYVeq7o=Qg@mail.gmail.com>

And now ISPCP agreed. So CSG does not want to hold it in 2019 and favors
every other year approach.


Farzaneh


On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 6:08 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> IPC announced it is against holding intersessional in 2019.
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 7:16 AM Tatiana Tropina <tatiana.tropina at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I am not sure how holding intersessional in 2019 would save us from the
>> possible cuts in 2020 as it would be a new fiscal year - if they would want
>> to cut it, they would cut it no matter what and will have more reasons to
>> do so if 2019 would have the same "productivity" as years before.
>> Cheers,
>> Tanya
>>
>> On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 13:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think it is important to remember that the Intersessional is currently
>>> a part of the core budget; if we reject the opportunity now, there is no
>>> guarantees that the line item will return in the budget for FY20. I think
>>> it would be something ICANN org would seek to cut out, reasoning, if we did
>>> not need it in FY19, why would we need it in FY20? I think it would be very
>>> regrettable if this happened.
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>
>>> On 31 Aug 2018, at 06:18, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks, Farzaneh.
>>> I expressed my opinion before as we should hold the intersessional in
>>> 2020 if we want really to change it. I heard carefully to the arguments
>>> made but I am still convinced that doesn't make sense to have it in 2019
>>> while we may sense a lukewarm position in the other side too.
>>> I don't think you should withdraw from deliberations. You are still a
>>> member of PC and you got to participate till the end of your term.
>>> committee work doesn't stop for few weeks and it is a continuity.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>> Le ven. 31 ao?t 2018 ? 12:22, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>>> a ?crit :
>>>
>>>> NCPH is being asked again by Mary to hold intersessional in 2019 or
>>>> not. BC already has said no and hold it in 2020, the CSG EC and others have
>>>> not responded. There was some decision from NCUC EC not to have it in 2019
>>>> but hold it in (2020) but that is because I had the impression that this
>>>> issue was resolved and this was also NCSG decision but seems like Arsene,
>>>> Ayden and Stephanie are in favor of holding it in 2019 as well (all
>>>> happened on the NCUC mailing list).
>>>>
>>>> You need to have a discussion here, perhaps on NCSG mailing list and
>>>> tell Mary the decision. We can just say we are undecided. I cannot hold off
>>>> the decision until Stephanie becomes chair because Mary needs to know now.
>>>> I suggest you also tell NPOC and NCUC that you are revisiting the issue to
>>>> see if they change their mind.
>>>>
>>>> Since I think it was implied that I should not decide since I am
>>>> outgoing (despite having discussed this in Feb and there were no comments
>>>> on it), I have decided not to engage with this discussion and leave it to
>>>> you.
>>>>
>>>> Just let me know. If I don't hear anything or there is no decision by
>>>> Wednesday next week I will let Mary know that NCSG is undecided.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Farzaneh
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20180901/80dfe86a/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Sun Sep  2 17:07:48 2018
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2018 14:07:48 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Intersessional
In-Reply-To: <CAN1qJvCCFRaGPwT5yWGQCUv3xcSEpejqzXHNJs17xYVeq7o=Qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAN1qJvCqocycwCqB-kb3Rb6-0_FE90zv3wr_6YQ=pEc8=k23Uw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThn5W+ehY62QpEdu4pE1mvQddSPv7Vtg-puO3w=c4DDVEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FEE410A3-C597-415C-A999-F0860658B32B@ferdeline.com>
 <CADxLtgc+W90tOsSZt6Z08bnCMBjJyDcEPus_Gm+iM04L-TbZzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvBnT3h+20K34QjVJCuYZh1i35S0PYzPX1GbYHNRdKK_wA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvCCFRaGPwT5yWGQCUv3xcSEpejqzXHNJs17xYVeq7o=Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <800031A8-27D1-4A38-90A7-D8DF31CED61F@ferdeline.com>

This is when we should be putting forward our reasons to the CSG for supporting the Intersessional.

But I know that is not going to happen.

A pity. There will not be an Intersessional in 2020 and the CSG must be delighted. They can now lobby ICANN without us being present.

> On 1 Sep 2018, at 19:38, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> And now ISPCP agreed. So CSG does not want to hold it in 2019 and favors every other year approach.
>
> Farzaneh
>
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 6:08 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> IPC announced it is against holding intersessional in 2019.
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 7:16 AM Tatiana Tropina <tatiana.tropina at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I am not sure how holding intersessional in 2019 would save us from the possible cuts in 2020 as it would be a new fiscal year - if they would want to cut it, they would cut it no matter what and will have more reasons to do so if 2019 would have the same "productivity" as years before.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Tanya
>>>
>>> On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 13:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think it is important to remember that the Intersessional is currently a part of the core budget; if we reject the opportunity now, there is no guarantees that the line item will return in the budget for FY20. I think it would be something ICANN org would seek to cut out, reasoning, if we did not need it in FY19, why would we need it in FY20? I think it would be very regrettable if this happened.
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>
>>>>> On 31 Aug 2018, at 06:18, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, Farzaneh.
>>>>> I expressed my opinion before as we should hold the intersessional in 2020 if we want really to change it. I heard carefully to the arguments made but I am still convinced that doesn't make sense to have it in 2019 while we may sense a lukewarm position in the other side too.
>>>>> I don't think you should withdraw from deliberations. You are still a member of PC and you got to participate till the end of your term. committee work doesn't stop for few weeks and it is a continuity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>> Le ven. 31 ao?t 2018 ? 12:22, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> a ?crit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> NCPH is being asked again by Mary to hold intersessional in 2019 or not. BC already has said no and hold it in 2020, the CSG EC and others have not responded. There was some decision from NCUC EC not to have it in 2019 but hold it in (2020) but that is because I had the impression that this issue was resolved and this was also NCSG decision but seems like Arsene, Ayden and Stephanie are in favor of holding it in 2019 as well (all happened on the NCUC mailing list).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You need to have a discussion here, perhaps on NCSG mailing list and tell Mary the decision. We can just say we are undecided. I cannot hold off the decision until Stephanie becomes chair because Mary needs to know now. I suggest you also tell NPOC and NCUC that you are revisiting the issue to see if they change their mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since I think it was implied that I should not decide since I am outgoing (despite having discussed this in Feb and there were no comments on it), I have decided not to engage with this discussion and leave it to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just let me know. If I don't hear anything or there is no decision by Wednesday next week I will let Mary know that NCSG is undecided.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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/20180902/b5d457a9/attachment.htm>

From farell at benin2point0.org  Tue Sep  4 11:53:42 2018
From: farell at benin2point0.org (Farell FOLLY)
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 09:53:42 +0100
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public Comment on ICANN strategy for Africa
Message-ID: <69D17398-3816-4D3B-AD20-BD507FA6792A@benin2point0.org>

Dear All,

I am sharing this draft with you for further notice. I drafted it and some of the volunteers provided some inputs, which I dit not alter yet. Please go through and made your own suggestions, comments or amend if any.

@Rafik, Can I share with the NCSG list at the same time or should I wait? Elections will probably get people busy and unfocused but by then the deadline will be over.


https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit> 

@__f_f__

Best Regards
____________________________________

(Ekue) Farell FOLLY
NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
linkedin.com/in/farellf 






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180904/7acaddfc/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Tue Sep  4 12:00:14 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 18:00:14 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public Comment on ICANN strategy for Africa
In-Reply-To: <69D17398-3816-4D3B-AD20-BD507FA6792A@benin2point0.org>
References: <69D17398-3816-4D3B-AD20-BD507FA6792A@benin2point0.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThkVm7fQF2iFYza34mMpQo1A7doR+ynY1U3TF515deQ-zA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Farell,

it should be shared in NCSG list as the deadline is 10th September. Work
doesn't stop during election :)

Rafik

Le mar. 4 sept. 2018 ? 17:53, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org> a
?crit :

> Dear All,
>
> I am sharing this draft with you for further notice. I drafted it and some
> of the volunteers provided some inputs, which I dit not alter yet. Please
> go through and made your own suggestions, comments or amend if any.
>
> @Rafik, Can I share with the NCSG list at the same time or should I wait?
> Elections will probably get people busy and unfocused but by then the
> deadline will be over.
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>
>
> @__f_f__
>
> Best Regards
> ____________________________________
>
> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180904/804a677c/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Fri Sep  7 16:58:15 2018
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 13:58:15 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] GNSO PDP 3.0 - summary report of feedback
 received
In-Reply-To: <9671416e30004819b0e51da4a37d0fe7@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org>
References: <26587_1535727850_5B8958EA_26587_129_1_B5939C6860701C49AA39C5DA5189448B91F32F1E@OPEXCLILMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
 <4FACEBB4FF4C5A4388B1A9444160FE0301B2E341D7@vm9202.intra.eurid.eu>
 <17268_1536317618_5B9258B2_17268_440_1_B5939C6860701C49AA39C5DA5189448B91F61E56@OPEXCLILMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
 <077301d446b1$0938cc60$1baa6520$@berrycobb.com>,
 <712C79F5-D6D1-40EB-A411-155736A67C5D@ferdeline.com>
 <9671416e30004819b0e51da4a37d0fe7@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org>
Message-ID: <C0EA1C67-5493-43C1-BC20-3DD06763218B@ferdeline.com>

I think this is quite a good report; should we share it with NCSG members? Would they be interested?

Ayden

> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Marika Konings" <marika.konings at icann.org>
> Subject: [council] GNSO PDP 3.0 - summary report of feedback received
>
> Date: 7 September 2018 at 14:18:26 CEST
> To: "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> Reply-To: "Marika Konings" <marika.konings at icann.org>
>
> Dear All,
>
> On behalf of Council leadership, please find attached the summary report of feedback received in preparation for the Webinar on GNSO Policy Development Process 3.0. This document forms reference material for the GNSO Council?s PDP 3.0 webinar on 11 September 2018. As a reminder, the aim of the webinar is to identify all recommendations with in-principle agreement, with the next step to be amending the Final Report for Council vote at the ICANN63 AGM.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> Marika Konings
>
> Vice President, Policy Development Support ? GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>
> Email: marika.konings at icann.org
>
> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
>
> Find out more about the GNSO by taking our [interactive courses](http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso) and visiting the [GNSO Newcomer pages](http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers).

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180907/f66a8a48/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: GNSO PDP 3.0 Feedback.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 676641 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180907/f66a8a48/attachment.pdf>

From stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca  Fri Sep  7 17:44:14 2018
From: stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 10:44:14 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] GNSO PDP 3.0 - summary report of
 feedback received
In-Reply-To: <C0EA1C67-5493-43C1-BC20-3DD06763218B@ferdeline.com>
References: <26587_1535727850_5B8958EA_26587_129_1_B5939C6860701C49AA39C5DA5189448B91F32F1E@OPEXCLILMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
 <4FACEBB4FF4C5A4388B1A9444160FE0301B2E341D7@vm9202.intra.eurid.eu>
 <17268_1536317618_5B9258B2_17268_440_1_B5939C6860701C49AA39C5DA5189448B91F61E56@OPEXCLILMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
 <077301d446b1$0938cc60$1baa6520$@berrycobb.com>
 <712C79F5-D6D1-40EB-A411-155736A67C5D@ferdeline.com>
 <9671416e30004819b0e51da4a37d0fe7@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org>
 <C0EA1C67-5493-43C1-BC20-3DD06763218B@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <9fb84e7e-3245-a3e9-75b7-b7b86332f8cf@digitaldiscretion.ca>

Why not?? It is good news, and it helps folks understand the work

Stephanie

On 2018-09-07 09:58, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
> I think this is quite a good report; should we share it with NCSG 
> members? Would they be interested?
>
> Ayden
>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> *From: *"Marika Konings" <marika.konings at icann.org 
>> <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
>> *Subject: **[council] GNSO PDP 3.0 - summary report of feedback received*
>> *Date: *7 September 2018 at 14:18:26 CEST
>> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>" 
>> <council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
>> *Reply-To: *"Marika Konings" <marika.konings at icann.org 
>> <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>> On behalf of Council leadership, please find attached the summary 
>> report of feedback received in preparation for the Webinar on GNSO 
>> Policy Development Process 3.0. This document forms reference 
>> material for the GNSO Council?s PDP 3.0 webinar on 11 September 2018. 
>> As a reminder, the aim of the webinar is to identify all 
>> recommendations with in-principle agreement, with the next step to be 
>> amending the Final Report for Council vote at the ICANN63 AGM.
>> Best regards,
>> Marika
>> */Marika Konings/*
>> /Vice President, Policy Development Support ? GNSO, Internet 
>> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) /
>> /Email:marika.konings at icann.org <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org> /
>> //
>> /Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO/
>> /Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses 
>> <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso>?and visiting the GNSO Newcomer 
>> pages 
>> <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>. 
>> /
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180907/2585cf40/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Sat Sep  8 01:00:10 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2018 07:00:10 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] GNSO PDP 3.0 - summary report of
 feedback received
In-Reply-To: <9fb84e7e-3245-a3e9-75b7-b7b86332f8cf@digitaldiscretion.ca>
References: <26587_1535727850_5B8958EA_26587_129_1_B5939C6860701C49AA39C5DA5189448B91F32F1E@OPEXCLILMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
 <4FACEBB4FF4C5A4388B1A9444160FE0301B2E341D7@vm9202.intra.eurid.eu>
 <17268_1536317618_5B9258B2_17268_440_1_B5939C6860701C49AA39C5DA5189448B91F61E56@OPEXCLILMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
 <077301d446b1$0938cc60$1baa6520$@berrycobb.com>
 <712C79F5-D6D1-40EB-A411-155736A67C5D@ferdeline.com>
 <9671416e30004819b0e51da4a37d0fe7@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org>
 <C0EA1C67-5493-43C1-BC20-3DD06763218B@ferdeline.com>
 <9fb84e7e-3245-a3e9-75b7-b7b86332f8cf@digitaldiscretion.ca>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThm79CYQymxz9OhEMBB3uur3zpfVYB=YoUG_yvh6eBtCDw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

It is not the final report, it is a summary of input and feedback received
and to be used as reference by council to make decision as we have webinar
this Tuesday with regard to input and next steps. Council leadership
prepared proposals for next steps to be shared during the webinar.


Best,

Rafik


On Fri, Sep 7, 2018, 11:45 PM Stephanie Perrin <
stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca> wrote:

> Why not?  It is good news, and it helps folks understand the work
>
> Stephanie
> On 2018-09-07 09:58, Ayden F?rdeline wrote:
>
> I think this is quite a good report; should we share it with NCSG members?
> Would they be interested?
>
> Ayden
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *"Marika Konings" <marika.konings at icann.org>
> *Subject: **[council] GNSO PDP 3.0 - summary report of feedback received*
> *Date: *7 September 2018 at 14:18:26 CEST
> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Reply-To: *"Marika Konings" <marika.konings at icann.org>
>
> Dear All,
>
> On behalf of Council leadership, please find attached the summary report
> of feedback received in preparation for the Webinar on GNSO Policy
> Development Process 3.0. This document forms reference material for the
> GNSO Council?s PDP 3.0 webinar on 11 September 2018. As a reminder, the aim
> of the webinar is to identify all recommendations with in-principle
> agreement, with the next step to be amending the Final Report for Council
> vote at the ICANN63 AGM.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> *Marika Konings*
> *Vice President, Policy Development Support ? GNSO, Internet Corporation
> for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *
> *Email: marika.konings at icann.org <marika.konings at icann.org>  *
>
> *Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO*
> *Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses
> <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages
> <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>. *
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing listNCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.ishttps://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/20180908/865aa4f6/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Sat Sep  8 11:34:57 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2018 17:34:57 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public Comment Review
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=tPFBe=ko4teT3Ceuc3xNjthgOg7LXkdu30LGpVNV6Ew@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

A small team of volunteers drafted this comment on  Study on Technical Use
of Root Zone Label Generation Rules
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit
.
I am sending this for Policy Committee review. please check the draft asap.
it is a short draft but important for us to monitor closely IDN discussion.
I am thinking to reach ICANN IDN related staff in the future to have some
sessions for our members to build awareness on IDN and identify NCSG
members who can follow those discussions.

Best Regards,

Rafik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180908/1f76b019/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Sun Sep  9 06:34:49 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2018 12:34:49 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan
 2016-2020 Version 3.0
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

Reminder about  reviewing the public comment
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit


Best,

Rafik

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
Date: Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 3:26 AM
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for
Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>


As a reminder, the link to the PC is:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit



On 4 Sep 2018, at 19:19, Farell FOLLY <farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG> wrote:

Dear All,

Following this message from Rafik regarding the Public Comment on ICANN
Strategy for Africa, many volunteers and I drafted our comment as NCSG. I,
therefore, invite everybody to take a look and make some suggestions and or
comments.

May people have already provided some inputs but I haven?t resolved any. I
prefer to not alter them and let the list check first.

*I would also like to remind us that the deadline is set on 10th of
September, let?s say in one week.*

Thanks for your usual cooperation.

@__f_f__

Best Regards
____________________________________

(Ekue) Farell FOLLY
NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
linkedin.com/in/farellf






On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:

Hi all,

ICANN published a new public comment, this time on the ICANN Africa
Strategic Plan 2016-2020.  Regional strategies started few year ago, in
Prague meeting 2012 in ad-hoc way and the first strategy was for Africa.

This public comment is an opportunity for NCSG as stakeholder group to give
input in the draft strategy and to see there is any area of concern or
improvement. It is also an opportunity for our members from Africa to
influence it and draft a comment. You can find more details about the
background of this public comment and the report  here  .
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en
<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en>

To kick-off the discussion I created this google doc to be used during the
drafting by the volunteers to populate it:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing


Please let me know offlist if you want to volunteer for the drafting. It is
good to have several people to volunteer together and work as team so they
can share the tasks such as analyzing the report, conducting some research,
find previous work, proofreading and so on. I will support you during the
drafting if you need any help during the whole process.

You can find previous public comment submitted by NCSG here
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018 and
listing those who drafted them. We submitted 3 responses to 3 public
comments last Friday and I want to thank all the drafters and reviewers for
the work done there in such short time to ensure that NCSG gives input on
those consultations.

Best Regards,

Rafik Dammak

NCSG Policy Committee Chair
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180909/996a70c1/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Sun Sep  9 22:45:09 2018
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2018 19:45:09 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: For Review: Comment on Study on Technical Use of
 Root Zone Label Generation Rules
In-Reply-To: <402F6676-79AA-4C0A-85EF-FD32533E8A77@ferdeline.com>
References: <CAPZSw-r0W3=+-o-OdqtpGNkihV9AVEs36nB38KgV9woFOkDOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <402F6676-79AA-4C0A-85EF-FD32533E8A77@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <8FC8A705-7CD6-4AB2-BA6D-A2E9B6C059A6@ferdeline.com>

Deadline for submissions is in 48 hours time.

I have reviewed the document now and proposed some suggested edits.

Please can you review too.

Best, Ayden

> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Rapha?l Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject: For Review: Comment on Study on Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules
>
> Date: 9 September 2018 at 06:53:55 CEST
> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> Reply-To: Rapha?l Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Please find here the comment that was drafted regarding the "Study on Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules"
>
> It is a rather short one. Deadline on 11 Sept 2359 UTC. Feel free to add suggestions and edits.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit
>
> Thank you!
>
> best,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180909/b7e63f14/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Sun Sep  9 23:00:18 2018
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2018 20:00:18 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan
 2016-2020 Version 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A52A49AA-448A-45C1-ADAC-8BCF014285D7@ferdeline.com>

Hi all,

I?m sorry that I did not get around to reviewing this document sooner.

I have just reviewed the proposed comment, and I think it is great. My sincere thanks to the drafters for their time taken preparing it. I support its submission.

Best wishes,

Ayden F?rdeline

> On 9 Sep 2018, at 05:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Reminder about  reviewing the public comment https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
> Date: Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 3:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>
> As a reminder, the link to the PC is: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>
>> On 4 Sep 2018, at 19:19, Farell FOLLY <farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Following this message from Rafik regarding the Public Comment on ICANN Strategy for Africa, many volunteers and I drafted our comment as NCSG. I, therefore, invite everybody to take a look and make some suggestions and or comments.
>>
>> May people have already provided some inputs but I haven?t resolved any. I prefer to not alter them and let the list check first.
>>
>> I would also like to remind us that the deadline is set on 10th of September, let?s say in one week.
>>
>> Thanks for your usual cooperation.
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>
>>> On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> ICANN published a new public comment, this time on the ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020.  Regional strategies started few year ago, in Prague meeting 2012 in ad-hoc way and the first strategy was for Africa.
>>>
>>> This public comment is an opportunity for NCSG as stakeholder group to give input in the draft strategy and to see there is any area of concern or improvement. It is also an opportunity for our members from Africa to influence it and draft a comment. You can find more details about the background of this public comment and the report  here  . [https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en ](https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en)
>>>
>>> To kick-off the discussion I created this google doc to be used during the drafting by the volunteers to populate it: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing
>>>
>>> Please let me know offlist if you want to volunteer for the drafting. It is good to have several people to volunteer together and work as team so they can share the tasks such as analyzing the report, conducting some research, find previous work, proofreading and so on. I will support you during the drafting if you need any help during the whole process.
>>>
>>> You can find previous public comment submitted by NCSG here https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018 and listing those who drafted them. We submitted 3 responses to 3 public comments last Friday and I want to thank all the drafters and reviewers for the work done there in such short time to ensure that NCSG gives input on those consultations.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Rafik Dammak
>>>
>>> NCSG Policy Committee Chair
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180909/b2f47d6f/attachment.htm>

From mpsilvavalent at gmail.com  Sun Sep  9 23:00:42 2018
From: mpsilvavalent at gmail.com (Martin Pablo Silva Valent)
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2018 17:00:42 -0300
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: For Review: Comment on Study on Technical Use of
 Root Zone Label Generation Rules
In-Reply-To: <8FC8A705-7CD6-4AB2-BA6D-A2E9B6C059A6@ferdeline.com>
References: <CAPZSw-r0W3=+-o-OdqtpGNkihV9AVEs36nB38KgV9woFOkDOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <402F6676-79AA-4C0A-85EF-FD32533E8A77@ferdeline.com>
 <8FC8A705-7CD6-4AB2-BA6D-A2E9B6C059A6@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <A26D2B24-C86E-458E-9001-19DE157F1A44@gmail.com>

I read it, I don?t have anything to add/comment, my support to move it forward.

Best,
Martin

> On 9 Sep 2018, at 16:45, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
> 
> Deadline for submissions is in 48 hours time.
> 
> I have reviewed the document now and proposed some suggested edits.
> 
> Please can you review too.
> 
> Best, Ayden
> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>> From: Rapha?l Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM <mailto:rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM>>
>> Subject: For Review: Comment on Study on Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules
>> Date: 9 September 2018 at 06:53:55 CEST
>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
>> Reply-To: Rapha?l Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM <mailto:rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM>>
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> Please find here the comment that was drafted regarding the "Study on Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules" 
>> 
>> It is a rather short one. Deadline on 11 Sept 2359 UTC. Feel free to add suggestions and edits.
>> 
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit>  
>> 
>> Thank you!
>> 
>> best,
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180909/b5cafd72/attachment.htm>

From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com  Sun Sep  9 23:01:56 2018
From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii)
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2018 16:01:56 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: For Review: Comment on Study on Technical Use of
 Root Zone Label Generation Rules
In-Reply-To: <A26D2B24-C86E-458E-9001-19DE157F1A44@gmail.com>
References: <CAPZSw-r0W3=+-o-OdqtpGNkihV9AVEs36nB38KgV9woFOkDOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <402F6676-79AA-4C0A-85EF-FD32533E8A77@ferdeline.com>
 <8FC8A705-7CD6-4AB2-BA6D-A2E9B6C059A6@ferdeline.com>
 <A26D2B24-C86E-458E-9001-19DE157F1A44@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN1qJvD2ZcnBGhq1ee_cQkXiaZJ-BDsDH9T9oeO+469qp-evQw@mail.gmail.com>

I am fine with this.

Farzaneh


On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 4:00 PM Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote:

> I read it, I don?t have anything to add/comment, my support to move it
> forward.
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
> On 9 Sep 2018, at 16:45, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>
> Deadline for submissions is in 48 hours time.
>
> I have reviewed the document now and proposed some suggested edits.
>
> Please can you review too.
>
> Best, Ayden
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *Rapha?l Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM>
> *Subject: **For Review: Comment on Study on Technical Use of Root Zone
> Label Generation Rules*
> *Date: *9 September 2018 at 06:53:55 CEST
> *To: *<NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> *Reply-To: *Rapha?l Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Please find here the comment that was drafted regarding the "Study on
> Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules"
>
> It is a rather short one. Deadline on 11 Sept 2359 UTC. Feel free to add
> suggestions and edits.
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit
>
>
> Thank you!
>
> best,
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180909/47d58eff/attachment.htm>

From tatiana.tropina at gmail.com  Sun Sep  9 23:40:55 2018
From: tatiana.tropina at gmail.com (Tatiana Tropina)
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2018 22:40:55 +0200
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: For Review: Comment on Study on Technical Use of
 Root Zone Label Generation Rules
In-Reply-To: <CAN1qJvD2ZcnBGhq1ee_cQkXiaZJ-BDsDH9T9oeO+469qp-evQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPZSw-r0W3=+-o-OdqtpGNkihV9AVEs36nB38KgV9woFOkDOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <402F6676-79AA-4C0A-85EF-FD32533E8A77@ferdeline.com>
 <8FC8A705-7CD6-4AB2-BA6D-A2E9B6C059A6@ferdeline.com>
 <A26D2B24-C86E-458E-9001-19DE157F1A44@gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvD2ZcnBGhq1ee_cQkXiaZJ-BDsDH9T9oeO+469qp-evQw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CADxLtgfqToS1_pLJUT_JGzcvZaCJ4eRo7YdQ76bH_H7F=AN-Ww@mail.gmail.com>

I am fine with the comment.
Cheers,
Tanya

On Sun, 9 Sep 2018 at 22:02, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I am fine with this.
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 4:00 PM Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
> mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I read it, I don?t have anything to add/comment, my support to move it
>> forward.
>>
>> Best,
>> Martin
>>
>> On 9 Sep 2018, at 16:45, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>>
>> Deadline for submissions is in 48 hours time.
>>
>> I have reviewed the document now and proposed some suggested edits.
>>
>> Please can you review too.
>>
>> Best, Ayden
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> *From: *Rapha?l Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM>
>> *Subject: **For Review: Comment on Study on Technical Use of Root Zone
>> Label Generation Rules*
>> *Date: *9 September 2018 at 06:53:55 CEST
>> *To: *<NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>> *Reply-To: *Rapha?l Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at GMAIL.COM>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Please find here the comment that was drafted regarding the "Study on
>> Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules"
>>
>> It is a rather short one. Deadline on 11 Sept 2359 UTC. Feel free to add
>> suggestions and edits.
>>
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit
>>
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> best,
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180909/977e7c14/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Mon Sep 10 01:37:51 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 07:37:51 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public Comment Review
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=tPFBe=ko4teT3Ceuc3xNjthgOg7LXkdu30LGpVNV6Ew@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=tPFBe=ko4teT3Ceuc3xNjthgOg7LXkdu30LGpVNV6Ew@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThk8M+bY3fCei363dmKzu9wPA+mCfWWh55KUjdE+7Wt5mg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

a reminder about reviewing the draft. I see that Martin, Farzaneh and
Tatiana are fine with the comment.

Best,

Rafik

Le sam. 8 sept. 2018 ? 17:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> Hi all,
>
> A small team of volunteers drafted this comment on  Study on Technical Use
> of Root Zone Label Generation Rules
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit
> .
> I am sending this for Policy Committee review. please check the draft
> asap. it is a short draft but important for us to monitor closely IDN
> discussion.
> I am thinking to reach ICANN IDN related staff in the future to have some
> sessions for our members to build awareness on IDN and identify NCSG
> members who can follow those discussions.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rafik
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180910/c97aae8f/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Mon Sep 10 01:59:57 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 07:59:57 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan
 2016-2020 Version 3.0
In-Reply-To: <A52A49AA-448A-45C1-ADAC-8BCF014285D7@ferdeline.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <A52A49AA-448A-45C1-ADAC-8BCF014285D7@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThnqywDKo3nwTHKGOBra25Gy6r7C4gojEQXtBo8Fji5P3A@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for the review and support.
there was a team of volunteers and Farell was the penholder and coordinator
for the effort.

Best,

Rafik

Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 05:00, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
?crit :

> Hi all,
>
> I?m sorry that I did not get around to reviewing this document sooner.
>
> I have just reviewed the proposed comment, and I think it is great. My
> sincere thanks to the drafters for their time taken preparing it. I support
> its submission.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden F?rdeline
>
> On 9 Sep 2018, at 05:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Reminder about  reviewing the public comment
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
> Date: Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 3:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for
> Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>
>
> As a reminder, the link to the PC is:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>
>
>
> On 4 Sep 2018, at 19:19, Farell FOLLY <farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Following this message from Rafik regarding the Public Comment on ICANN
> Strategy for Africa, many volunteers and I drafted our comment as NCSG. I,
> therefore, invite everybody to take a look and make some suggestions and or
> comments.
>
> May people have already provided some inputs but I haven?t resolved any. I
> prefer to not alter them and let the list check first.
>
> *I would also like to remind us that the deadline is set on 10th of
> September, let?s say in one week.*
>
> Thanks for your usual cooperation.
>
> @__f_f__
>
> Best Regards
> ____________________________________
>
> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> ICANN published a new public comment, this time on the ICANN Africa
> Strategic Plan 2016-2020.  Regional strategies started few year ago, in
> Prague meeting 2012 in ad-hoc way and the first strategy was for Africa.
>
> This public comment is an opportunity for NCSG as stakeholder group to
> give input in the draft strategy and to see there is any area of concern or
> improvement. It is also an opportunity for our members from Africa to
> influence it and draft a comment. You can find more details about the
> background of this public comment and the report  here  .
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en
> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en>
>
> To kick-off the discussion I created this google doc to be used during the
> drafting by the volunteers to populate it:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> Please let me know offlist if you want to volunteer for the drafting. It
> is good to have several people to volunteer together and work as team so
> they can share the tasks such as analyzing the report, conducting some
> research, find previous work, proofreading and so on. I will support you
> during the drafting if you need any help during the whole process.
>
> You can find previous public comment submitted by NCSG here
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018 and
> listing those who drafted them. We submitted 3 responses to 3 public
> comments last Friday and I want to thank all the drafters and reviewers for
> the work done there in such short time to ensure that NCSG gives input on
> those consultations.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rafik Dammak
>
> NCSG Policy Committee Chair
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180910/128ac89b/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Mon Sep 10 05:27:20 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 11:27:20 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] Changed subject: CSC Effectiveness Review
In-Reply-To: <A416941AD213C9428D623560432AFBB691D3D8C4@stntexmb102.cis.neustar.com>
References: <A416941AD213C9428D623560432AFBB691D3D8C4@stntexmb102.cis.neustar.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThm2WmB-vsO=A4fZ+GeRQXNVuTSoB55OjtHa20BUn6n8-w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

this proposal looks ok for me and makes sense.
the CSC is working without problems and we just did its charter review with
small changes. the IFR has a different role and can use any input if deemed
useful, we also have our representative there.

Best,

Rafik


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Austin, Donna via council <council at gnso.icann.org>
Date: lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 10:25
Subject: [council] Changed subject: CSC Effectiveness Review
To: council at gnso.icann.org <council at gnso.icann.org>


Sorry folks, that should have been CSC Effectiveness Review



*From:* council [mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Austin,
Donna via council
*Sent:* Monday, September 10, 2018 10:37 AM
*To:* council at gnso.icann.org
*Subject:* [council] CSC Charter Review



Dear Councilors



On 27 June 2018, as part of the motion to approve the CSC Amended Charter,
the GNSO Council appointed Philippe and I to work with representatives from
the ccNSO (Debbie Monahan and Martin Boyle) to conduct an analysis of the
requirements of the IANA Naming Function Review and the CSC Effectiveness
Review with a view to creating synergies and avoiding overlap between the
two reviews in light of the fact that the reviews are expected to start in
October 2018.



Philippe and I have had a number of teleconferences with Debbie and Martin,
and a meeting face to face in Panama City, during which we discussed the
requirements of the IANA Naming Function Review and the CSC Effectiveness
Review and explored a number of options for addressing any potential or
perceived overlap. As a result of these discussions the group has concluded
that the most practical and efficient path forward is for the ccNSO and
GNSO to appoint two members each to conduct the CSC Effectiveness Review
and that this Review would become an input to the IANA Naming Function
Review.



We reached this conclusion on the basis that the recently concluded CSC
Charter Review established that the CSC is working well and is
non-controversial; the Final Report of the CSC Charter Review provides a
good platform from which to conduct an effectiveness Review; and that the
primary purpose of the IANA Naming Function Review is to review the
performance of PTI in performing the IANA Function and therefore is not
likely to spend too much time reviewing the effectiveness of the CSC.



We have made some progress on developing an outline for how the
effectiveness review can be conducted and this will be provided for Council
consideration in the near term. It is our intention that this outline will
satisfy the requirement in the Charter and the ICANN bylaws that the method
of the review will be determined by the ccNSO and GNSO.



Philippe and I are willing to represent the GNSO in conducting the CSC
Effectiveness Review, and likewise Debbie and Martin are also willing to
continue to represent the ccNSO.



If there is no objection, Philippe and I will develop a motion for the
consent agenda of our meeting on 27 September 2018, that will provide the
outline of the Effectiveness Review and our appointment to represent the
GNSO in this effort.



Thanks



Donna





*Donna Austin*
*Neustar, Inc.* / Senior Policy Manager, Registry Solutions
*Mobile:* +1 310 890 9655
*donna.austin at team.neustar <donna.austin at team.neustar>* / *Website:*
home.neustar
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.home.neustar_&d=DwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=3VfZQp_iCZguUeCZyM16Y8GctAvJk0XBpcRKMpY9pwc&s=SFI9nLXDVzyk_c876jt-hBGRbphCXmPYq5BKpzvavKc&e=>



*Follow Neustar:* LinkedIn
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_5349&d=DwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=3VfZQp_iCZguUeCZyM16Y8GctAvJk0XBpcRKMpY9pwc&s=gTEkBZE9e5d6WQVzd_QVXzsUSAucJbkYWeImR-uiWy0&e=>
*/* Twitter
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_neustar&d=DwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=3VfZQp_iCZguUeCZyM16Y8GctAvJk0XBpcRKMpY9pwc&s=GK092nU65pKb699at49iTSwG2pGgksKFxV-C0wOiCY4&e=>
Reduce your environmental footprint. Print only if necessary.
------------------------------

The information contained in this email message is intended only for the
use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or
privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have
received this email message in error and any review, dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and
delete the original message.


_______________________________________________
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/20180910/8cec834f/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Mon Sep 10 16:33:55 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 22:33:55 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan
 2016-2020 Version 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThnqywDKo3nwTHKGOBra25Gy6r7C4gojEQXtBo8Fji5P3A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <A52A49AA-448A-45C1-ADAC-8BCF014285D7@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sThnqywDKo3nwTHKGOBra25Gy6r7C4gojEQXtBo8Fji5P3A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThnrpgbJvuF0R4cJ_PuYcBgCbMk1rh7Ph1u4B9rBJU1HQg@mail.gmail.com>

hi all,

we are few hours away from the deadline. if there is no strong objection in
coming hours, the comment will be considered as endorsed.
please review.

Best,

Rafik


Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 07:59, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> Thanks for the review and support.
> there was a team of volunteers and Farell was the penholder and
> coordinator for the effort.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 05:00, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I?m sorry that I did not get around to reviewing this document sooner.
>>
>> I have just reviewed the proposed comment, and I think it is great. My
>> sincere thanks to the drafters for their time taken preparing it. I support
>> its submission.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>
>> On 9 Sep 2018, at 05:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Reminder about  reviewing the public comment
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>> Date: Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 3:26 AM
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for
>> Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>
>>
>> As a reminder, the link to the PC is:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4 Sep 2018, at 19:19, Farell FOLLY <farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Following this message from Rafik regarding the Public Comment on ICANN
>> Strategy for Africa, many volunteers and I drafted our comment as NCSG. I,
>> therefore, invite everybody to take a look and make some suggestions and or
>> comments.
>>
>> May people have already provided some inputs but I haven?t resolved any.
>> I prefer to not alter them and let the list check first.
>>
>> *I would also like to remind us that the deadline is set on 10th of
>> September, let?s say in one week.*
>>
>> Thanks for your usual cooperation.
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> ICANN published a new public comment, this time on the ICANN Africa
>> Strategic Plan 2016-2020.  Regional strategies started few year ago, in
>> Prague meeting 2012 in ad-hoc way and the first strategy was for Africa.
>>
>> This public comment is an opportunity for NCSG as stakeholder group to
>> give input in the draft strategy and to see there is any area of concern or
>> improvement. It is also an opportunity for our members from Africa to
>> influence it and draft a comment. You can find more details about the
>> background of this public comment and the report  here  .
>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en
>> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en>
>>
>> To kick-off the discussion I created this google doc to be used during
>> the drafting by the volunteers to populate it:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>>
>> Please let me know offlist if you want to volunteer for the drafting. It
>> is good to have several people to volunteer together and work as team so
>> they can share the tasks such as analyzing the report, conducting some
>> research, find previous work, proofreading and so on. I will support you
>> during the drafting if you need any help during the whole process.
>>
>> You can find previous public comment submitted by NCSG here
>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018 and
>> listing those who drafted them. We submitted 3 responses to 3 public
>> comments last Friday and I want to thank all the drafters and reviewers for
>> the work done there in such short time to ensure that NCSG gives input on
>> those consultations.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rafik Dammak
>>
>> NCSG Policy Committee Chair
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180910/a4a6df46/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Tue Sep 11 03:08:14 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 09:08:14 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan
 2016-2020 Version 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThnqywDKo3nwTHKGOBra25Gy6r7C4gojEQXtBo8Fji5P3A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <A52A49AA-448A-45C1-ADAC-8BCF014285D7@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sThnqywDKo3nwTHKGOBra25Gy6r7C4gojEQXtBo8Fji5P3A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThm2jkZ32cHKbwmSzN=DCGUBWNyVFFJ2Jquc61ULv3rCWg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

in absence of objection, I submitted the comment on Africa Strategy (draft
attached).

Best,

Rafik


Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 07:59, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> Thanks for the review and support.
> there was a team of volunteers and Farell was the penholder and
> coordinator for the effort.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 05:00, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I?m sorry that I did not get around to reviewing this document sooner.
>>
>> I have just reviewed the proposed comment, and I think it is great. My
>> sincere thanks to the drafters for their time taken preparing it. I support
>> its submission.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>
>> On 9 Sep 2018, at 05:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Reminder about  reviewing the public comment
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>> Date: Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 3:26 AM
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for
>> Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>
>>
>> As a reminder, the link to the PC is:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4 Sep 2018, at 19:19, Farell FOLLY <farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Following this message from Rafik regarding the Public Comment on ICANN
>> Strategy for Africa, many volunteers and I drafted our comment as NCSG. I,
>> therefore, invite everybody to take a look and make some suggestions and or
>> comments.
>>
>> May people have already provided some inputs but I haven?t resolved any.
>> I prefer to not alter them and let the list check first.
>>
>> *I would also like to remind us that the deadline is set on 10th of
>> September, let?s say in one week.*
>>
>> Thanks for your usual cooperation.
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> ICANN published a new public comment, this time on the ICANN Africa
>> Strategic Plan 2016-2020.  Regional strategies started few year ago, in
>> Prague meeting 2012 in ad-hoc way and the first strategy was for Africa.
>>
>> This public comment is an opportunity for NCSG as stakeholder group to
>> give input in the draft strategy and to see there is any area of concern or
>> improvement. It is also an opportunity for our members from Africa to
>> influence it and draft a comment. You can find more details about the
>> background of this public comment and the report  here  .
>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en
>> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en>
>>
>> To kick-off the discussion I created this google doc to be used during
>> the drafting by the volunteers to populate it:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>>
>> Please let me know offlist if you want to volunteer for the drafting. It
>> is good to have several people to volunteer together and work as team so
>> they can share the tasks such as analyzing the report, conducting some
>> research, find previous work, proofreading and so on. I will support you
>> during the drafting if you need any help during the whole process.
>>
>> You can find previous public comment submitted by NCSG here
>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018 and
>> listing those who drafted them. We submitted 3 responses to 3 public
>> comments last Friday and I want to thank all the drafters and reviewers for
>> the work done there in such short time to ensure that NCSG gives input on
>> those consultations.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rafik Dammak
>>
>> NCSG Policy Committee Chair
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180911/3a6a91bf/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0 - NCSG Comment.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 93404 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180911/3a6a91bf/attachment.pdf>

From farell at benin2point0.org  Tue Sep 11 10:47:01 2018
From: farell at benin2point0.org (Farell FOLLY)
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 08:47:01 +0100
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan
 2016-2020 Version 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThm2jkZ32cHKbwmSzN=DCGUBWNyVFFJ2Jquc61ULv3rCWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <A52A49AA-448A-45C1-ADAC-8BCF014285D7@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sThnqywDKo3nwTHKGOBra25Gy6r7C4gojEQXtBo8Fji5P3A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThm2jkZ32cHKbwmSzN=DCGUBWNyVFFJ2Jquc61ULv3rCWg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CF077FE1-4A9A-4022-ABCA-F08E90D796BC@benin2point0.org>

Well done Rafik and thanks.

@__f_f__

Best Regards
____________________________________

(Ekue) Farell FOLLY
NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
linkedin.com/in/farellf 






> On 11 Sep 2018, at 01:08, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> in absence of objection, I submitted the comment on Africa Strategy (draft attached).
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> 
> Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 07:59, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> a ?crit :
> Thanks for the review and support.
> there was a team of volunteers and Farell was the penholder and coordinator for the effort.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 05:00, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> a ?crit :
> Hi all,
> 
> I?m sorry that I did not get around to reviewing this document sooner.
> 
> I have just reviewed the proposed comment, and I think it is great. My sincere thanks to the drafters for their time taken preparing it. I support its submission.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Ayden F?rdeline
> 
>> On 9 Sep 2018, at 05:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Reminder about  reviewing the public comment https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit> 
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Rafik 
>> 
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org <mailto:farell at benin2point0.org>>
>> Date: Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 3:26 AM
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>>
>> 
>> 
>> As a reminder, the link to the PC is: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 4 Sep 2018, at 19:19, Farell FOLLY <farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG <mailto:farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear All,
>>> 
>>> Following this message from Rafik regarding the Public Comment on ICANN Strategy for Africa, many volunteers and I drafted our comment as NCSG. I, therefore, invite everybody to take a look and make some suggestions and or comments.
>>> 
>>> May people have already provided some inputs but I haven?t resolved any. I prefer to not alter them and let the list check first.
>>> 
>>> I would also like to remind us that the deadline is set on 10th of September, let?s say in one week.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your usual cooperation.
>>> 
>>> @__f_f__
>>> 
>>> Best Regards
>>> ____________________________________
>>> 
>>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>>> linkedin.com/in/farellf <http://linkedin.com/in/farellf> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM <mailto:rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> ICANN published a new public comment, this time on the ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020.  Regional strategies started few year ago, in Prague meeting 2012 in ad-hoc way and the first strategy was for Africa.
>>>> 
>>>> This public comment is an opportunity for NCSG as stakeholder group to give input in the draft strategy and to see there is any area of concern or improvement. It is also an opportunity for our members from Africa to influence it and draft a comment. You can find more details about the background of this public comment and the report  here  . https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en? <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en>
>>>> 
>>>> To kick-off the discussion I created this google doc to be used during the drafting by the volunteers to populate it: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing>  
>>>> 
>>>> Please let me know offlist if you want to volunteer for the drafting. It is good to have several people to volunteer together and work as team so they can share the tasks such as analyzing the report, conducting some research, find previous work, proofreading and so on. I will support you during the drafting if you need any help during the whole process. 
>>>> 
>>>> You can find previous public comment submitted by NCSG here https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018 <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018> and listing those who drafted them. We submitted 3 responses to 3 public comments last Friday and I want to thank all the drafters and reviewers for the work done there in such short time to ensure that NCSG gives input on those consultations.
>>>> 
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Rafik Dammak
>>>> 
>>>> NCSG Policy Committee Chair 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> <Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0 - NCSG Comment.pdf>_______________________________________________
> 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/20180911/aa7f70a3/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Tue Sep 11 16:43:26 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 22:43:26 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public Comment Review
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThk8M+bY3fCei363dmKzu9wPA+mCfWWh55KUjdE+7Wt5mg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=tPFBe=ko4teT3Ceuc3xNjthgOg7LXkdu30LGpVNV6Ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThk8M+bY3fCei363dmKzu9wPA+mCfWWh55KUjdE+7Wt5mg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThkswuW8DnH18zRq7DKRozG0f_gG52hd5jVLbpFBAHa4rA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

the deadline is a few hours away, in absence of strong objections the
comment will be submitted.
Thanks.

Best,

Rafik

Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 07:37, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> Hi all,
>
> a reminder about reviewing the draft. I see that Martin, Farzaneh and
> Tatiana are fine with the comment.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le sam. 8 sept. 2018 ? 17:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> A small team of volunteers drafted this comment on  Study on Technical
>> Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit
>> .
>> I am sending this for Policy Committee review. please check the draft
>> asap. it is a short draft but important for us to monitor closely IDN
>> discussion.
>> I am thinking to reach ICANN IDN related staff in the future to have some
>> sessions for our members to build awareness on IDN and identify NCSG
>> members who can follow those discussions.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180911/c15099b4/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Wed Sep 12 01:29:09 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 07:29:09 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public Comment Review
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThkswuW8DnH18zRq7DKRozG0f_gG52hd5jVLbpFBAHa4rA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=tPFBe=ko4teT3Ceuc3xNjthgOg7LXkdu30LGpVNV6Ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThk8M+bY3fCei363dmKzu9wPA+mCfWWh55KUjdE+7Wt5mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThkswuW8DnH18zRq7DKRozG0f_gG52hd5jVLbpFBAHa4rA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThkbNQSfZTt0+hRjoJtkpu8KGRAU-66nkcPE+91TXSFKGQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

as I didn't hear any objection and previous on expressed support from some
PC members, I think we can submit the comment (attached).

Best,

Rafik

Le mar. 11 sept. 2018 ? 22:43, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> Hi all,
>
> the deadline is a few hours away, in absence of strong objections the
> comment will be submitted.
> Thanks.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 07:37, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> a reminder about reviewing the draft. I see that Martin, Farzaneh and
>> Tatiana are fine with the comment.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> Le sam. 8 sept. 2018 ? 17:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>> ?crit :
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> A small team of volunteers drafted this comment on  Study on Technical
>>> Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i8loPUiEqrzKfVI4daPWaUZa-adR7ovYCHUA2RA-hfU/edit
>>> .
>>> I am sending this for Policy Committee review. please check the draft
>>> asap. it is a short draft but important for us to monitor closely IDN
>>> discussion.
>>> I am thinking to reach ICANN IDN related staff in the future to have
>>> some sessions for our members to build awareness on IDN and identify NCSG
>>> members who can follow those discussions.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180912/5e882069/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: NCSG comment on the Study on Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 57502 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180912/5e882069/attachment.pdf>

From arsenebaguma at gmail.com  Wed Sep 12 10:30:07 2018
From: arsenebaguma at gmail.com (=?utf-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne_Tungali?=)
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 09:30:07 +0200
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan
 2016-2020 Version 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CF077FE1-4A9A-4022-ABCA-F08E90D796BC@benin2point0.org>
References: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <A52A49AA-448A-45C1-ADAC-8BCF014285D7@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sThnqywDKo3nwTHKGOBra25Gy6r7C4gojEQXtBo8Fji5P3A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThm2jkZ32cHKbwmSzN=DCGUBWNyVFFJ2Jquc61ULv3rCWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CF077FE1-4A9A-4022-ABCA-F08E90D796BC@benin2point0.org>
Message-ID: <80C0D77D-B968-4B7C-891F-02A3DD4702A1@gmail.com>

Such a well done job, everyone. I was sick for the past few days so was not able to go to work. I am now catching up. My apologies for having been silent on this effort. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 11 Sep 2018, at 09:47, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org> wrote:
> 
> Well done Rafik and thanks.
> 
> @__f_f__
> 
> Best Regards
> ____________________________________
> 
> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
> linkedin.com/in/farellf 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On 11 Sep 2018, at 01:08, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> in absence of objection, I submitted the comment on Africa Strategy (draft attached).
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Rafik
>> 
>> 
>>> Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 07:59, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a ?crit :
>>> Thanks for the review and support.
>>> there was a team of volunteers and Farell was the penholder and coordinator for the effort.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Rafik
>>> 
>>>> Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 ? 05:00, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a ?crit :
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> I?m sorry that I did not get around to reviewing this document sooner.
>>>> 
>>>> I have just reviewed the proposed comment, and I think it is great. My sincere thanks to the drafters for their time taken preparing it. I support its submission.
>>>> 
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>> 
>>>> Ayden F?rdeline
>>>> 
>>>>> On 9 Sep 2018, at 05:34, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Reminder about  reviewing the public comment https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Rafik 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>>>>> Date: Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 3:26 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
>>>>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> As a reminder, the link to the PC is: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 4 Sep 2018, at 19:19, Farell FOLLY <farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Following this message from Rafik regarding the Public Comment on ICANN Strategy for Africa, many volunteers and I drafted our comment as NCSG. I, therefore, invite everybody to take a look and make some suggestions and or comments.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> May people have already provided some inputs but I haven?t resolved any. I prefer to not alter them and let the list check first.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would also like to remind us that the deadline is set on 10th of September, let?s say in one week.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks for your usual cooperation.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> @__f_f__
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>> ____________________________________
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>>>>>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/farellf 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ICANN published a new public comment, this time on the ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020.  Regional strategies started few year ago, in Prague meeting 2012 in ad-hoc way and the first strategy was for Africa.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This public comment is an opportunity for NCSG as stakeholder group to give input in the draft strategy and to see there is any area of concern or improvement. It is also an opportunity for our members from Africa to influence it and draft a comment. You can find more details about the background of this public comment and the report  here  . https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> To kick-off the discussion I created this google doc to be used during the drafting by the volunteers to populate it: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing  
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please let me know offlist if you want to volunteer for the drafting. It is good to have several people to volunteer together and work as team so they can share the tasks such as analyzing the report, conducting some research, find previous work, proofreading and so on. I will support you during the drafting if you need any help during the whole process. 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> You can find previous public comment submitted by NCSG here https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018 and listing those who drafted them. We submitted 3 responses to 3 public comments last Friday and I want to thank all the drafters and reviewers for the work done there in such short time to ensure that NCSG gives input on those consultations.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Rafik Dammak
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> NCSG Policy Committee Chair 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> <Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0 - NCSG Comment.pdf>_______________________________________________
>> 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/20180912/fc50dec5/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Sat Sep 15 10:44:45 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2018 16:44:45 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review on the draft Recommendations for Managing IDN
 Variant Top-Level Domains
In-Reply-To: <36B5FA7A-F69E-4063-B0C7-579D08901FC6@benin2point0.org>
References: <36B5FA7A-F69E-4063-B0C7-579D08901FC6@benin2point0.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThnraO5k+9cz-dLXnis7FURSpUTQ2Y58PCaxO7QkNaUCZQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

please review the draft comment
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit.
the deadline for submission is the 17th September.

Best,

Rafik


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>



Dear All,

This is another public comment on the IDN for review. It is a brief comment
but all new suggestions are welcome. The deadline is to the 17th of
September.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit

@__f_f__

Best Regards
____________________________________

(Ekue) Farell FOLLY
NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
linkedin.com/in/farellf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180915/14a945b6/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Mon Sep 17 16:06:51 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 22:06:51 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review on the draft Recommendations for Managing IDN
 Variant Top-Level Domains
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThnraO5k+9cz-dLXnis7FURSpUTQ2Y58PCaxO7QkNaUCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <36B5FA7A-F69E-4063-B0C7-579D08901FC6@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sThnraO5k+9cz-dLXnis7FURSpUTQ2Y58PCaxO7QkNaUCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThmdHT8Tu9Z1FFt68prC8U=HvotfmOnoeLJBUnVsNNtfdg@mail.gmail.com>

hi all,

please review the draft statement, the deadline for submission is today.

Best,

Rafik

Le sam. 15 sept. 2018 ? 16:44, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> Hi all,
>
> please review the draft comment
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit.
> the deadline for submission is the 17th September.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> This is another public comment on the IDN for review. It is a brief
> comment but all new suggestions are welcome. The deadline is to the 17th of
> September.
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit
>
> @__f_f__
>
> Best Regards
> ____________________________________
>
> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180917/5e85805d/attachment.htm>

From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca  Mon Sep 17 18:25:54 2018
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 11:25:54 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Review Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan
 2016-2020 Version 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH5sTh=Qca+-n5_bQGwz=B5cjxCkx3uCau5==FVGUOMGHuix4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <335fa494-6d06-c627-0eaa-dfd4a37cc493@mail.utoronto.ca>

I think it is a great comment, I am sorry I did not review it earlier as 
there are a few typos but it is a very strong comment.

Stephanie

On 2018-09-08 23:34, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Reminder about? reviewing the public comment 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Farell FOLLY* <farell at benin2point0.org 
> <mailto:farell at benin2point0.org>>
> Date: Wed, Sep 5, 2018, 3:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for 
> Comment on Draft ICANN Africa Strategic Plan 2016-2020 Version 3.0
> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>>
>
>
> As a reminder, the link to the PC is: 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit 
>
>
>
>> On 4 Sep 2018, at 19:19, Farell FOLLY <farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG 
>> <mailto:farell at BENIN2POINT0.ORG>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Following this message from Rafik regarding the Public Comment on 
>> ICANN Strategy for Africa, many volunteers and I drafted our comment 
>> as NCSG. I, therefore, invite everybody to take a look and make some 
>> suggestions and or comments.
>>
>> May people have already provided some inputs but I haven?t resolved 
>> any. I prefer to not alter them and let the list check first.
>>
>> *I would also like to remind us that the deadline is set on 10th of 
>> September, let?s say in one week.*
>>
>> Thanks for your usual cooperation.
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf <http://linkedin.com/in/farellf>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM 
>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> ICANN published a new public comment, this time on the ICANN Africa 
>>> Strategic Plan 2016-2020. Regional strategies started few year ago, 
>>> in Prague meeting 2012 in ad-hoc way and the first strategy was for 
>>> Africa.
>>>
>>> This public comment is an opportunity for NCSG as stakeholder group 
>>> to give input in the draft strategy and to see there is any area of 
>>> concern or improvement. It is also an opportunity for our members 
>>> from Africa to influence it and draft a comment. You can find more 
>>> details about the background of this public comment and the report 
>>> here? . 
>>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en 
>>> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/africa-strategic-plan-2018-07-30-en>
>>>
>>> To kick-off the discussion I created this google doc to be used 
>>> during the drafting by the volunteers to populate it: 
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit?usp=sharing 
>>>
>>>
>>> Please let me know offlist if you want to volunteer for the 
>>> drafting. It is good to have several people to volunteer together 
>>> and work as team so they can share the tasks such as analyzing the 
>>> report, conducting some research, find previous work, proofreading 
>>> and so on. I will support you during the drafting if you need any 
>>> help during the whole process.
>>>
>>> You can find previous public comment submitted by NCSG here 
>>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018?and 
>>> listing those who drafted them. We submitted 3 responses to 3 public 
>>> comments last Friday and I want to thank all the drafters and 
>>> reviewers for the work done there in such short time to ensure that 
>>> NCSG gives input on those consultations.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Rafik Dammak
>>>
>>> NCSG Policy Committee Chair
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180917/1d5dcdb4/attachment.htm>

From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca  Mon Sep 17 18:29:11 2018
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 11:29:11 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public Comment on ICANN strategy for Africa
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThkVm7fQF2iFYza34mMpQo1A7doR+ynY1U3TF515deQ-zA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <69D17398-3816-4D3B-AD20-BD507FA6792A@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sThkVm7fQF2iFYza34mMpQo1A7doR+ynY1U3TF515deQ-zA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8d1a10d4-1755-ec71-a641-9a5fecad0907@mail.utoronto.ca>

This is a great comment, congratulations to all who worked on it and 
especially Farell as pen-holder.

Stephanie Perrin

On 2018-09-04 05:00, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi Farell,
>
> it should be shared in NCSG list as the deadline is 10th September. 
> Work doesn't stop during election :)
>
> Rafik
>
> Le?mar. 4 sept. 2018 ??17:53, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org 
> <mailto:farell at benin2point0.org>> a ?crit?:
>
>     Dear All,
>
>     I am sharing this draft with you for further notice. I drafted it
>     and some of the volunteers provided some inputs, which I dit not
>     alter yet. Please go through and made your own suggestions,
>     comments or amend if any.
>
>     @Rafik, Can I share with the NCSG list at the same time or should
>     I wait? Elections will probably get people busy and unfocused but
>     by then the deadline will be over.
>
>
>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit
>
>
>     @__f_f__
>
>     Best Regards
>     ____________________________________
>
>     (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>     NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>     linkedin.com/in/farellf <http://linkedin.com/in/farellf>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180917/9910cf24/attachment.htm>

From kathy at kathykleiman.com  Tue Sep 18 00:59:33 2018
From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman)
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 17:59:33 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Deadline Extended: New gTLD Subsequent
 Procedures PDP WG Initial Report - Public Comment
In-Reply-To: <CADAEEV0sf7t4Xd=wjsvc4myAQnn_SX+-5R_1ZzYXMiHj0CUzsA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <A4555603-8A2D-43DC-9155-82F64F443ECC@icann.org>
 <CAN1qJvAsvSCMak2F1N8yW1qKZoe+kR+WsFBhWRDTkONjJxicKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=wyjZmH-NJntszp8dFJFpuWgzqgDSM0sWJe27QDNjB6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHFwYbfYNgZLBKx=GtM2bqypR6zmbLHT0QJnrU==J2VeMgg-XA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADAEEV0sf7t4Xd=wjsvc4myAQnn_SX+-5R_1ZzYXMiHj0CUzsA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9f1f861e-5475-eb84-4921-a6a35e2b80fc@kathykleiman.com>

Hi Bruna, Elsa, All,

The Subpro WG deadline is rapidly approaching (as you know!) I've added 
a few more points to the draft comments (how could SubPro WG ask so many 
open-ended questions?)? We have much agreement in our comments, and they 
are long and very substantial. There also appear to be a few points of 
differences which would merit some discussion. The document also needs a 
good edit from our great editors.

Better late than never, shall we meet (or did the meeting already take 
place)?

Best, Kathy


On 8/26/2018 10:14 AM, Bruna Martins dos Santos wrote:
> Interested!
>
> Em s?b, 25 de ago de 2018 21:54, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com 
> <mailto:elsa.saade at gmail.com>> escreveu:
>
>     Hi all,
>
>     Any chance we could meet this coming week to fix the document?
>     I?ll touch base with Robin and maybe Kathy to see if they could
>     join us to answer some of our questions on the doc. In the
>     meantime, I?ll be reviewing the doc and seeing if we could add any
>     further points.
>
>     Let me know if interested! I can set up a google doc.
>
>     E.
>     ?
>
>     On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 7:27 PM Rafik Dammak
>     <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Thanks Farzaneh, that is good for us.
>         I touched base few days ago with Elsa and Bruna regarding the
>         status of our draft and we are currently progressing.? I think
>         Kathy is also helping for the review and Robin will be
>         consulted too.
>         as reminder we organized few weeks ago a NCSG webinar
>         (https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/NCSG+Webinars)
>         on the report presented by Robin where she highlighted the
>         most important and relevant topics for us, I advice everyone
>         to listen to it. while the report is 300 pages (there are
>         appendices etc), it can be easier to listen to the webinar and
>         check the spreadsheet made by the WG with all the
>         recommendations and questions organized by topic.
>
>         Best,
>
>         Rafik
>
>         Le?ven. 24 ao?t 2018 ??01:31, farzaneh badii
>         <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com <mailto:farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>> a
>         ?crit?:
>
>             we got some time for this huge document to comment on. A
>             big Phew.
>
>             Farzaneh
>
>
>             ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>             From: *Emily Barabas*
>
>
>             Dear Farzaneh,
>
>             We are writing to let you know that the public comment
>             period
>             <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gtld-subsequent-procedures-initial-2018-07-03-en>
>             for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG Initial
>             Report has been extended. Public comments will now be
>             accepted through *26 September 2018*. Can you kindly
>             assist in sharing this information with the relevant
>             members of your group?
>
>             Best regards,
>
>             Cheryl Langdon-Orr and Jeff Neuman (WG Co-Chairs)
>
>             *From: *Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org
>             <mailto:nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>>
>             *Date: *Wednesday, 4 July 2018 at 04:50
>             *To: *farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com
>             <mailto:farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>>
>             *Cc: *"jeff.neuman at comlaude.com
>             <mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>"
>             <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com
>             <mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>>, Cheryl Langdon-Orr
>             <langdonorr at gmail.com <mailto:langdonorr at gmail.com>>,
>             Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org
>             <mailto:steve.chan at icann.org>>, Julie Hedlund
>             <julie.hedlund at icann.org
>             <mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org>>, Emily Barabas
>             <emily.barabas at icann.org
>             <mailto:emily.barabas at icann.org>>, Maryam Bakoshi
>             <maryam.bakoshi at icann.org
>             <mailto:maryam.bakoshi at icann.org>>, "gnso-secs at icann.org
>             <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>" <gnso-secs at icann.org
>             <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>>
>             *Subject: *New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG Initial
>             Report - Public Comment
>
>             Dear Farzaneh,
>
>             We write to you as the Co-Chairs of the GNSO?s New gTLD
>             Subsequent Procedures Working Group (WG), which is tasked
>             with calling upon the community?s collective experiences
>             from the 2012 New gTLD Program round to consider potential
>             changes that may be needed to the existing 2007
>             Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains policy
>             recommendations and implementation. We are pleased to
>             share that the Working Group has reached an important
>             milestone by publishing its Initial Report for Public
>             Comment [icann.org]
>             <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2Dcomments_gtld-2Dsubsequent-2Dprocedures-2Dinitial-2D2018-2D07-2D03-2Den&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=4gYyCwhtEI98RlWT6m_3FasU_W94CPJVbYvXvdaDxws&s=TwT7TfmDQ6Na2XFI7TKEFTn4pi5z-7JSXypjqAP6rRE&e=>.
>             We would like to strongly encourage you to review this
>             report and provide feedback through public comment on the
>             draft preliminary recommendations, options, and questions
>             for community feedback. Your input is essential to the
>             success of this PDP.
>
>             *1. Background on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG*
>
>             The GNSO?s New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group
>             (WG), which was chartered by the GNSO Council to conduct a
>             Policy Development Process (PDP), is seeking to determine
>             what, if any, changes may need to be made to the
>             existing/Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains/
>             [gnso.icann.org]
>             <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_issues_new-2Dgtlds_pdp-2Ddec05-2Dfr-2Dparta-2D08aug07.htm&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=4gYyCwhtEI98RlWT6m_3FasU_W94CPJVbYvXvdaDxws&s=fAYAOAlC7DqbvB0WyYMiIOXAkUC6kzqPgR62nsJhHCQ&e=>//policy
>             recommendations from 8 August 2007 as well as the
>             finalApplicant Guidebook [newgtlds.icann.org]
>             <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newgtlds.icann.org_en_applicants_agb&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=4gYyCwhtEI98RlWT6m_3FasU_W94CPJVbYvXvdaDxws&s=iK3CVAc8mCe_CJRGZTBv2B_bDcoekw7F1Tg2uNLpbsI&e=>dated
>             June 2012. As the original policy recommendations as
>             adopted by the GNSO Council and ICANN Board have ?been
>             designed to produce systemized and ongoing mechanisms for
>             applicants to propose new top-level domains,? those policy
>             recommendations remain in place for subsequent rounds of
>             the New gTLD Program unless the GNSO Council would decide
>             to modify those policy recommendations via a policy
>             development process. The PDP WG created 5 Work Tracks that
>             are responsible for considering the subjects within its
>             charter. The PDP WG sought community input through two
>             community comment periods. The Working Group has produced
>             its Initial Report, which includes material from the full
>             Working Group and Work Tracks 1-4. Work Track 5, focused
>             on Geographic Names at the Top-Level, was established
>             later than the other Work Tracks and will produce a
>             separate Initial Report.
>
>             *2. Information about the Initial Report and the Public
>             Comment*
>
>             The objective of this Initial Report is to document the
>             Working Group?s deliberations on charter issues and
>             preliminary recommendations, potential options for
>             recommendations, as well as specific questions for which
>             the Working Group is seeking input. Given the large number
>             of issues, and the thousands of hours spent on addressing
>             the 2012 New gTLD Program and improvements that can be
>             made to the program moving forward, unlike other Initial
>             Reports, this one does not contain a ?Statement of level
>             of consensus for the recommendations presented in the
>             Initial Report.? The Co-Chairs not only believed that it
>             was premature to measure the level of consensus of the
>             Working Group members of dozens of recommendations
>             contained within the Initial Report, but that doing so
>             could have the unintended consequence of locking Working
>             Group members into positions of support or opposition
>             prior to soliciting public comment from the community on
>             those recommendations. To form such definitive positions
>             at this early of a stage could have the adverse effect of
>             being less open to modifications to those positions as a
>             result of community input.
>
>             In addition, though many of the preliminary
>             recommendations were generally agreed to by members that
>             participated in the different Work Tracks, support has not
>             been assessed amongst the members of the overall Working
>             Group. The Overall Working Group has not sought to form
>             definitive positions on each of these issues at this
>             stage. Therefore, any language in this report that
>             suggests that the Working Group or any of its Work Tracks
>             is making a recommendation should be read as merely a
>             rough assessment by the Working Group Co-Chairs or Work
>             Track leads.
>
>             After a comprehensive review of public comments received
>             on this report, the Working Group will deliberate further
>             on the preliminary recommendations contained within the
>             Initial Report. It is possible that as a result of the
>             deliberations, there may be supplemental reports released
>             by the Working Group seeking additional public comments.
>             Once all of that is completed, the Co-Chairs will conduct
>             any formal consensus call(s) at the plenary level, on all
>             recommendations before the Working Group issues its Final
>             Report.
>
>             Thank you for your consideration of this request. We look
>             forward to any comments and any input that you and the
>             organization you Chair are able to provide to our WG.
>             While we of course welcome input on any area of the
>             report, we would like to stress that given the extensive
>             number of topics and preliminary outcomes, you should not
>             feel compelled to respond to every single preliminary
>             recommendation, option, and question. If possible, please
>             submit your comments and input to us by 5 September 2018
>             so that we may fully consider it in our further deliberations.
>
>             Best regards,
>
>             Cheryl Langdon-Orr and Jeff Neuman (WG Co-Chairs)
>
>             Nathalie Peregrine
>
>             Manager, Operations Support (GNSO)
>
>             Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>
>             Email: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org
>             <http://nathalie.peregrine at icann.org%20>
>
>             Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann
>
>             Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive
>             courses?and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages
>             <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DgMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=-d9m4sr16OXloyLjz4TF6npbe51hgE0EHtoX1U6WUOA&s=Bw2Uzbh2Pu1X0lObLtbwtN5ZNEP3ECdPAfcqzVvIOYE&e=>
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             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
>
>     -- 
>     --
>
>     Elsa Saade
>     Consultant
>     Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>     Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180917/6a69c738/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Tue Sep 18 01:19:41 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 07:19:41 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Deadline Extended: New gTLD Subsequent
 Procedures PDP WG Initial Report - Public Comment
In-Reply-To: <9f1f861e-5475-eb84-4921-a6a35e2b80fc@kathykleiman.com>
References: <A4555603-8A2D-43DC-9155-82F64F443ECC@icann.org>
 <CAN1qJvAsvSCMak2F1N8yW1qKZoe+kR+WsFBhWRDTkONjJxicKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=wyjZmH-NJntszp8dFJFpuWgzqgDSM0sWJe27QDNjB6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHFwYbfYNgZLBKx=GtM2bqypR6zmbLHT0QJnrU==J2VeMgg-XA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADAEEV0sf7t4Xd=wjsvc4myAQnn_SX+-5R_1ZzYXMiHj0CUzsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <9f1f861e-5475-eb84-4921-a6a35e2b80fc@kathykleiman.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThnQXUTB1cCGBfHPJBwagcjdw6wKo=SJP37cBVv0jL_6kA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Kathy,

Bruna and Elsa worked on the draft in the last days. The draft will be
shared shortly to NCSG list as we got few days left for membership
consultation. We will continue the work on disagreement areas in meantime.

Best,

Rafik

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018, 7:00 AM Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com> wrote:

> Hi Bruna, Elsa, All,
>
> The Subpro WG deadline is rapidly approaching (as you know!) I've added a
> few more points to the draft comments (how could SubPro WG ask so many
> open-ended questions?)  We have much agreement in our comments, and they
> are long and very substantial. There also appear to be a few points of
> differences which would merit some discussion. The document also needs a
> good edit from our great editors.
>
> Better late than never, shall we meet (or did the meeting already take
> place)?
>
> Best, Kathy
>
> On 8/26/2018 10:14 AM, Bruna Martins dos Santos wrote:
>
> Interested!
>
> Em s?b, 25 de ago de 2018 21:54, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> escreveu:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Any chance we could meet this coming week to fix the document? I?ll touch
>> base with Robin and maybe Kathy to see if they could join us to answer some
>> of our questions on the doc. In the meantime, I?ll be reviewing the doc and
>> seeing if we could add any further points.
>>
>> Let me know if interested! I can set up a google doc.
>>
>> E.
>> ?
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 7:27 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Farzaneh, that is good for us.
>>> I touched base few days ago with Elsa and Bruna regarding the status of
>>> our draft and we are currently progressing.  I think Kathy is also helping
>>> for the review and Robin will be consulted too.
>>> as reminder we organized few weeks ago a NCSG webinar (
>>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/NCSG+Webinars) on
>>> the report presented by Robin where she highlighted the most important and
>>> relevant topics for us, I advice everyone to listen to it. while the report
>>> is 300 pages (there are appendices etc), it can be easier to listen to the
>>> webinar and check the spreadsheet made by the WG with all the
>>> recommendations and questions organized by topic.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> Le ven. 24 ao?t 2018 ? 01:31, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>>> a ?crit :
>>>
>>>> we got some time for this huge document to comment on. A big Phew.
>>>>
>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>> From: Emily Barabas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear Farzaneh,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We are writing to let you know that the public comment period
>>>> <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gtld-subsequent-procedures-initial-2018-07-03-en>
>>>> for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG Initial Report has been
>>>> extended. Public comments will now be accepted through *26 September
>>>> 2018*. Can you kindly assist in sharing this information with the
>>>> relevant members of your group?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Cheryl Langdon-Orr and Jeff Neuman (WG Co-Chairs)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From: *Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>
>>>> *Date: *Wednesday, 4 July 2018 at 04:50
>>>> *To: *farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>>>> *Cc: *"jeff.neuman at comlaude.com" <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>, Cheryl
>>>> Langdon-Orr <langdonorr at gmail.com>, Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>,
>>>> Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org>, Emily Barabas <
>>>> emily.barabas at icann.org>, Maryam Bakoshi <maryam.bakoshi at icann.org>, "
>>>> gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>
>>>> *Subject: *New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG Initial Report -
>>>> Public Comment
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear Farzaneh,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We write to you as the Co-Chairs of the GNSO?s New gTLD Subsequent
>>>> Procedures Working Group (WG), which is tasked with calling upon the
>>>> community?s collective experiences from the 2012 New gTLD Program round to
>>>> consider potential changes that may be needed to the existing 2007
>>>> Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains policy recommendations and
>>>> implementation. We are pleased to share that the Working Group has reached
>>>> an important milestone by publishing its Initial Report for Public
>>>> Comment [icann.org]
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2Dcomments_gtld-2Dsubsequent-2Dprocedures-2Dinitial-2D2018-2D07-2D03-2Den&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=4gYyCwhtEI98RlWT6m_3FasU_W94CPJVbYvXvdaDxws&s=TwT7TfmDQ6Na2XFI7TKEFTn4pi5z-7JSXypjqAP6rRE&e=>.
>>>> We would like to strongly encourage you to review this report and provide
>>>> feedback through public comment on the draft preliminary recommendations,
>>>> options, and questions for community feedback. Your input is essential to
>>>> the success of this PDP.
>>>>
>>>> *1.    Background on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG*
>>>>
>>>> The GNSO?s New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group (WG), which was
>>>> chartered by the GNSO Council to conduct a Policy Development Process
>>>> (PDP), is seeking to determine what, if any, changes may need to be made to
>>>> the existing *Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains*
>>>> [gnso.icann.org]
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_issues_new-2Dgtlds_pdp-2Ddec05-2Dfr-2Dparta-2D08aug07.htm&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=4gYyCwhtEI98RlWT6m_3FasU_W94CPJVbYvXvdaDxws&s=fAYAOAlC7DqbvB0WyYMiIOXAkUC6kzqPgR62nsJhHCQ&e=> policy
>>>> recommendations from 8 August 2007 as well as the final Applicant
>>>> Guidebook [newgtlds.icann.org]
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newgtlds.icann.org_en_applicants_agb&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=4gYyCwhtEI98RlWT6m_3FasU_W94CPJVbYvXvdaDxws&s=iK3CVAc8mCe_CJRGZTBv2B_bDcoekw7F1Tg2uNLpbsI&e=>
>>>> dated June 2012. As the original policy recommendations as adopted by the
>>>> GNSO Council and ICANN Board have ?been designed to produce systemized and
>>>> ongoing mechanisms for applicants to propose new top-level domains,? those
>>>> policy recommendations remain in place for subsequent rounds of the New
>>>> gTLD Program unless the GNSO Council would decide to modify those policy
>>>> recommendations via a policy development process. The PDP WG created 5 Work
>>>> Tracks that are responsible for considering the subjects within its
>>>> charter. The PDP WG sought community input through two community comment
>>>> periods. The Working Group has produced its Initial Report, which includes
>>>> material from the full Working Group and Work Tracks 1-4. Work Track 5,
>>>> focused on Geographic Names at the Top-Level, was established later than
>>>> the other Work Tracks and will produce a separate Initial Report.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *2.    Information about the Initial Report and the Public Comment*
>>>>
>>>> The objective of this Initial Report is to document the Working Group?s
>>>> deliberations on charter issues and preliminary recommendations, potential
>>>> options for recommendations, as well as specific questions for which the
>>>> Working Group is seeking input. Given the large number of issues, and the
>>>> thousands of hours spent on addressing the 2012 New gTLD Program and
>>>> improvements that can be made to the program moving forward, unlike other
>>>> Initial Reports, this one does not contain a ?Statement of level of
>>>> consensus for the recommendations presented in the Initial Report.? The
>>>> Co-Chairs not only believed that it was premature to measure the level of
>>>> consensus of the Working Group members of dozens of recommendations
>>>> contained within the Initial Report, but that doing so could have the
>>>> unintended consequence of locking Working Group members into positions of
>>>> support or opposition prior to soliciting public comment from the community
>>>> on those recommendations. To form such definitive positions at this early
>>>> of a stage could have the adverse effect of being less open to
>>>> modifications to those positions as a result of community input.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In addition, though many of the preliminary recommendations were
>>>> generally agreed to by members that participated in the different Work
>>>> Tracks, support has not been assessed amongst the members of the overall
>>>> Working Group. The Overall Working Group has not sought to form definitive
>>>> positions on each of these issues at this stage. Therefore, any language in
>>>> this report that suggests that the Working Group or any of its Work Tracks
>>>> is making a recommendation should be read as merely a rough assessment by
>>>> the Working Group Co-Chairs or Work Track leads.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> After a comprehensive review of public comments received on this
>>>> report, the Working Group will deliberate further on the preliminary
>>>> recommendations contained within the Initial Report. It is possible that as
>>>> a result of the deliberations, there may be supplemental reports released
>>>> by the Working Group seeking additional public comments. Once all of that
>>>> is completed, the Co-Chairs will conduct any formal consensus call(s) at
>>>> the plenary level, on all recommendations before the Working Group issues
>>>> its Final Report.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your consideration of this request. We look forward to
>>>> any comments and any input that you and the organization you Chair are able
>>>> to provide to our WG. While we of course welcome input on any area of the
>>>> report, we would like to stress that given the extensive number of topics
>>>> and preliminary outcomes, you should not feel compelled to respond to every
>>>> single preliminary recommendation, option, and question. If possible,
>>>> please submit your comments and input to us by 5 September 2018 so that we
>>>> may fully consider it in our further deliberations.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Cheryl Langdon-Orr and Jeff Neuman (WG Co-Chairs)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nathalie Peregrine
>>>>
>>>> Manager, Operations Support (GNSO)
>>>>
>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>>>>
>>>> Email: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org
>>>> <http://nathalie.peregrine at icann.org%20>
>>>>
>>>> Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and
>>>> visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DgMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=-d9m4sr16OXloyLjz4TF6npbe51hgE0EHtoX1U6WUOA&s=Bw2Uzbh2Pu1X0lObLtbwtN5ZNEP3ECdPAfcqzVvIOYE&e=>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>>
>>> --
>> --
>>
>> Elsa Saade
>> Consultant
>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing listNCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.ishttps://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link>
> <#m_7443176349579071491_m_-3092939637335886701_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180918/bf362a3d/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Tue Sep 18 03:07:50 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 09:07:50 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [urgent] Re: Review on the draft Recommendations for
 Managing IDN Variant Top-Level Domains
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThmdHT8Tu9Z1FFt68prC8U=HvotfmOnoeLJBUnVsNNtfdg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <36B5FA7A-F69E-4063-B0C7-579D08901FC6@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sThnraO5k+9cz-dLXnis7FURSpUTQ2Y58PCaxO7QkNaUCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmdHT8Tu9Z1FFt68prC8U=HvotfmOnoeLJBUnVsNNtfdg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThmFsKG3v=pVCsP_HiUFVA0GwVDkAyrOWwYHSdu2FjxJCg@mail.gmail.com>

hi all,

the deadline passed but it is possible to submit. please chime in
the draft comment is quite short.

Best,

Rafik

Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 ? 22:06, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> hi all,
>
> please review the draft statement, the deadline for submission is today.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le sam. 15 sept. 2018 ? 16:44, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> please review the draft comment
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit.
>> the deadline for submission is the 17th September.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> This is another public comment on the IDN for review. It is a brief
>> comment but all new suggestions are welcome. The deadline is to the 17th of
>> September.
>>
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180918/a78f2f96/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Tue Sep 18 04:23:40 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 10:23:40 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>

hi all,

the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go
through the comment.

Best,

Rafik


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>


Dear all,

Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report on
the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Overarching
Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).

Elsa and I are still working on this document
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit>
so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and
the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this
share this with the NCSG list soon.

We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is very
much welcome.

Best,
Bruna and Elsa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180918/4c343ead/attachment.htm>

From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com  Tue Sep 18 07:52:29 2018
From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 00:52:29 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [urgent] Re: Review on the draft Recommendations for
 Managing IDN Variant Top-Level Domains
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThmFsKG3v=pVCsP_HiUFVA0GwVDkAyrOWwYHSdu2FjxJCg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <36B5FA7A-F69E-4063-B0C7-579D08901FC6@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sThnraO5k+9cz-dLXnis7FURSpUTQ2Y58PCaxO7QkNaUCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmdHT8Tu9Z1FFt68prC8U=HvotfmOnoeLJBUnVsNNtfdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmFsKG3v=pVCsP_HiUFVA0GwVDkAyrOWwYHSdu2FjxJCg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN1qJvB_7gQttdQ0oD+NE19RdPvGOLkEaQqVWkjWp+kZfabAbA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi All

I know we are all overburdened with a lot of work and I thank whoever
drafted this document. But I think this comment needs further improvement.
We are not really addressing the issues that the report is asking for.
I pasted the questions. I am sorry I am of no help, I really don't have the
time to read carefully but here are my observations:
1. I think something pertinent to question 3 and 4 (and I might be wrong)
is that if they want to again delegate the name of the countries in IDN to
the cctld managers, these managers should not be allowed to use UDRP
service providers such as WIPO.  (I don't know how far they go, do they
delegate  similar names of countries and territories -overreach alert- or
exact names? I could not figure out)
Why am I against that? Because even in non IDN ccTLDs we see trademark
overreach. Amazon has claimed so many domain names that have had
similarities to Amazon in ccTLDs that Amazon did not even have any business
at!!! Rest assured that this is going to happen to IDNs as well. Note that
processes such as WIPO are most of the time only in English.
If we are defenders of diversity I think this is where we should act!

Anyhow. I might be wrong. As I said it was a cursory review and general
knowledge.If we cannot elaborate on the questions below, then I think we
should not submit the comment in its current state.

Questions that were asked:


   1. *The rationale for the RZ-LGR requires strictly adhering to the IDN
   variant label sets defined by the community through the RZ-LGR. Is this a
   reasonable pre-requisite for implementing IDN Variant TLDs?*
   2. *Do the proposed recommendations appropriately address the management
   and implementation of the IDN Variant TLDs?*
      1. *Do any suggested recommendations need to be changed? Why?*
      2. *Are any additional recommendations needed?*
   3. *Does the analysis suitably cover the impact of the recommendations
   on existing procedures for IDN ccTLDs and IDN gTLDs? Is there alternate
   analysis for certain cases? Are there any additional impacts on the
   procedures not identified?*
   4. *Which (if any) of the recommendations require policy consideration
   by GNSO and ccNSO, whereas the remaining would only have an impact on
   procedures?*
   5. *To prevent the permutation issue which can be introduced by using
   variant labels, as identified by SSAC, how may the allocated IDN
   Variant TLD labels be limited? Are the mechanisms suggested in Appendix C
   appropriate? What other factors may also be relevant?*
   6. *Are the risks and their mitigation measures sufficiently
   comprehensive? Are there any additional risks? Should there be different or
   additional mitigation measures?*

Farzaneh


On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 8:08 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> hi all,
>
> the deadline passed but it is possible to submit. please chime in
> the draft comment is quite short.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 ? 22:06, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> hi all,
>>
>> please review the draft statement, the deadline for submission is today.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> Le sam. 15 sept. 2018 ? 16:44, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>> ?crit :
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> please review the draft comment
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit.
>>> the deadline for submission is the 17th September.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> This is another public comment on the IDN for review. It is a brief
>>> comment but all new suggestions are welcome. The deadline is to the 17th of
>>> September.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit
>>>
>>> @__f_f__
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> ____________________________________
>>>
>>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180918/95948637/attachment.htm>

From farell at benin2point0.org  Tue Sep 18 12:42:48 2018
From: farell at benin2point0.org (Farell FOLLY)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 10:42:48 +0100
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [urgent] Re: Review on the draft Recommendations for
 Managing IDN Variant Top-Level Domains
In-Reply-To: <CAN1qJvB_7gQttdQ0oD+NE19RdPvGOLkEaQqVWkjWp+kZfabAbA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <36B5FA7A-F69E-4063-B0C7-579D08901FC6@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sThnraO5k+9cz-dLXnis7FURSpUTQ2Y58PCaxO7QkNaUCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmdHT8Tu9Z1FFt68prC8U=HvotfmOnoeLJBUnVsNNtfdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmFsKG3v=pVCsP_HiUFVA0GwVDkAyrOWwYHSdu2FjxJCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvB_7gQttdQ0oD+NE19RdPvGOLkEaQqVWkjWp+kZfabAbA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F1E19972-57D2-421B-92F1-1FE22B178491@benin2point0.org>

Hi Farzaneh,

I was part of the drafters' team and I must confess that I did not put too much effort on the work since I was also concerned with other Public Comments that required an effective attention from me, too.

Not only the question asked and the IDN issues as a whole require a high technical knowledge and experience with the subject, but also there was a lot of documents to read and a strong background to have before writing something. I went through all the docs but I could not answer most of the questions with enough confidence within the time slot proposed. If you still can, don?t hesitate, go ahead and edit the draft. However; there is no issue/problem not answering all the questions?. We can write ?no answer? or ?NIHIL?. 

As far as not submitting a comment here (in state or not), I must refer to Rafik, the policy Chair whose vision is rather to always comment/acknowledge on/a calls.

Regarding the questions and in my opinion, 1 is yes, 2a is yes, 2.b is possible (but needs further discussions within NCSG) 3 is mostly yes but with some nuances to clarify. For 5, I am unable to answer by now (further reading and IDN knowledge to gain). Regarding the 6th, what you are describing seems to be a valid additional risk, and there may be many others to add but with strong rationale (to describe and to simulate their impacts)


That?s it!

@__f_f__

Best Regards
____________________________________

(Ekue) Farell FOLLY
NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
linkedin.com/in/farellf 






> On 18 Sep 2018, at 05:52, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi All
> 
> I know we are all overburdened with a lot of work and I thank whoever drafted this document. But I think this comment needs further improvement. We are not really addressing the issues that the report is asking for.
> I pasted the questions. I am sorry I am of no help, I really don't have the time to read carefully but here are my observations: 
> 1. I think something pertinent to question 3 and 4 (and I might be wrong) is that if they want to again delegate the name of the countries in IDN to the cctld managers, these managers should not be allowed to use UDRP service providers such as WIPO.  (I don't know how far they go, do they delegate  similar names of countries and territories -overreach alert- or exact names? I could not figure out)
> Why am I against that? Because even in non IDN ccTLDs we see trademark overreach. Amazon has claimed so many domain names that have had similarities to Amazon in ccTLDs that Amazon did not even have any business at!!! Rest assured that this is going to happen to IDNs as well. Note that processes such as WIPO are most of the time only in English.
> If we are defenders of diversity I think this is where we should act! 
> 
> Anyhow. I might be wrong. As I said it was a cursory review and general knowledge.If we cannot elaborate on the questions below, then I think we should not submit the comment in its current state.
> 
> Questions that were asked:
> 
> The rationale for the RZ-LGR requires strictly adhering to the IDN variant label sets defined by the community through the RZ-LGR. Is this a reasonable pre-requisite for implementing IDN Variant TLDs?
> Do the proposed recommendations appropriately address the management and implementation of the IDN Variant TLDs?
> Do any suggested recommendations need to be changed? Why?
> Are any additional recommendations needed?
> Does the analysis suitably cover the impact of the recommendations on existing procedures for IDN ccTLDs and IDN gTLDs? Is there alternate analysis for certain cases? Are there any additional impacts on the procedures not identified?
> Which (if any) of the recommendations require policy consideration by GNSO and ccNSO, whereas the remaining would only have an impact on procedures?
> To prevent the permutation issue which can be introduced by using variant labels, as identified by SSAC, how may the allocated IDN Variant TLD labels be limited? Are the mechanisms suggested in Appendix C appropriate? What other factors may also be relevant?
> Are the risks and their mitigation measures sufficiently comprehensive? Are there any additional risks? Should there be different or additional mitigation measures?
> Farzaneh
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 8:08 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
> hi all,
> 
> the deadline passed but it is possible to submit. please chime in
> the draft comment is quite short.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 ? 22:06, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> a ?crit :
> hi all,
> 
> please review the draft statement, the deadline for submission is today.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> Le sam. 15 sept. 2018 ? 16:44, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> a ?crit :
> Hi all,
> 
> please review the draft comment https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit>. the deadline for submission is the 17th September.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org <mailto:farell at benin2point0.org>>
> 
> 
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> This is another public comment on the IDN for review. It is a brief comment but all new suggestions are welcome. The deadline is to the 17th of September.
> 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit>
> 
> @__f_f__
> 
> Best Regards
> ____________________________________
> 
> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
> linkedin.com/in/farellf <http://linkedin.com/in/farellf> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180918/0da28745/attachment.htm>

From farell at benin2point0.org  Tue Sep 18 12:49:34 2018
From: farell at benin2point0.org (Farell FOLLY)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 10:49:34 +0100
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public Comment on ICANN strategy for Africa
In-Reply-To: <8d1a10d4-1755-ec71-a641-9a5fecad0907@mail.utoronto.ca>
References: <69D17398-3816-4D3B-AD20-BD507FA6792A@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sThkVm7fQF2iFYza34mMpQo1A7doR+ynY1U3TF515deQ-zA@mail.gmail.com>
 <8d1a10d4-1755-ec71-a641-9a5fecad0907@mail.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <C0F46A84-0136-4A4F-BE3A-5AF09413AA04@benin2point0.org>

Thanks Steph and all for the kind words. It was very interesting working on this Public Comment.

@__f_f__

Best Regards
____________________________________

(Ekue) Farell FOLLY
NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
linkedin.com/in/farellf 






> On 17 Sep 2018, at 16:29, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at MAIL.UTORONTO.CA> wrote:
> 
> This is a great comment, congratulations to all who worked on it and especially Farell as pen-holder.
> 
> Stephanie Perrin
> On 2018-09-04 05:00, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> Hi Farell,
>> 
>> it should be shared in NCSG list as the deadline is 10th September. Work doesn't stop during election :)
>> 
>> Rafik 
>> 
>> Le mar. 4 sept. 2018 ? 17:53, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org <mailto:farell at benin2point0.org>> a ?crit :
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> I am sharing this draft with you for further notice. I drafted it and some of the volunteers provided some inputs, which I dit not alter yet. Please go through and made your own suggestions, comments or amend if any.
>> 
>> @Rafik, Can I share with the NCSG list at the same time or should I wait? Elections will probably get people busy and unfocused but by then the deadline will be over.
>> 
>> 
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGTNxgct2a01Z4lAKdt5m-pxx3Lyemc8lZ0sgAoA65E/edit> 
>> 
>> @__f_f__
>> 
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>> 
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf <http://linkedin.com/in/farellf> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180918/fde85a42/attachment.htm>

From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com  Tue Sep 18 22:38:42 2018
From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 19:38:42 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Meetings during ICANN Barcelona
Message-ID: <1ed1e977-db3b-43d4-1b9a-e3d2248d3aab@mixmax.com>

Hi everybody
During Barcelona we will have NCSG open session. At the moment the agenda looks
like this:
- Introduction- Reminding ourselves what we do at NCSG (our values/our mission/
our focus) very short presentation- Meeting with GNSO board members- Meeting
with law enforcement- Meeting with Bryan Schilling- Meeting with EPDP leadership
(Rafik and Kurt)- Meeting with ICANN finance team- SSR2 17.30- ALAC 18.00
As things unfold we can shuffle, cancel or add.
Any other ideas?
Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180918/506c6d32/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Wed Sep 19 03:04:22 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 09:04:22 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Meetings during ICANN Barcelona
In-Reply-To: <1ed1e977-db3b-43d4-1b9a-e3d2248d3aab@mixmax.com>
References: <1ed1e977-db3b-43d4-1b9a-e3d2248d3aab@mixmax.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=8ciecVhZA+b8-vS82Jvvvwvmw3iQPLAUCON67EfOyvQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Farzaneh,

Thanks for the draft,

Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 ? 04:38, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> Hi everybody
>
> During Barcelona we will have NCSG open session. At the moment the agenda
> looks like this:
>
> - Introduction
> - Reminding ourselves what we do at NCSG (our values/our mission/ our
> focus) very short presentation
> - Meeting with GNSO board members
>
maybe agreeing on the topics to be discussed too in addition to what we got
for the board-ncsg joint meeting
also inviting Avri and possibly other board members if possible

> - Meeting with law enforcement
>
I assume we will talk whois/RDS access?

> - Meeting with Bryan Schilling
>

- Meeting with EPDP leadership (Rafik and Kurt)
>
 ok

> - Meeting with ICANN finance team
> - SSR2 17.30
> - ALAC 18.00
>
> is this last item clashing with the informal council meeting?

do we have an idea about the time allocated for each slot?
I think the agenda is quite crammed already, so I won't suggest adding but
it seems we dont have more than 1 slot for internal discussion (in fact
presentation).

Best,

Rafik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180919/03ac2b19/attachment.htm>

From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com  Wed Sep 19 03:08:31 2018
From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 20:08:31 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Meetings during ICANN Barcelona
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=8ciecVhZA+b8-vS82Jvvvwvmw3iQPLAUCON67EfOyvQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1ed1e977-db3b-43d4-1b9a-e3d2248d3aab@mixmax.com>
 <CAH5sTh=8ciecVhZA+b8-vS82Jvvvwvmw3iQPLAUCON67EfOyvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN1qJvAn4NvKK=mWM6mwvs+gXrYKKcCGvPqXToZH2MqBz_T+QQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Rafik

Non of the meetings other than ALAC and SSR2 been set. So these are just
ideas we can juggle, remove or replace. I just wanted to know if the PC
members been working on something that they don't see on the agenda and
want it to be added or if they thought am item is not necessary.

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 8:04 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Farzaneh,
>
> Thanks for the draft,
>
> Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 ? 04:38, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> a ?crit :
>
>> Hi everybody
>>
>> During Barcelona we will have NCSG open session. At the moment the agenda
>> looks like this:
>>
>> - Introduction
>> - Reminding ourselves what we do at NCSG (our values/our mission/ our
>> focus) very short presentation
>> - Meeting with GNSO board members
>>
> maybe agreeing on the topics to be discussed too in addition to what we
> got for the board-ncsg joint meeting
> also inviting Avri and possibly other board members if possible
>
>> - Meeting with law enforcement
>>
> I assume we will talk whois/RDS access?
>
>> - Meeting with Bryan Schilling
>>
>
> - Meeting with EPDP leadership (Rafik and Kurt)
>>
>  ok
>
>> - Meeting with ICANN finance team
>> - SSR2 17.30
>> - ALAC 18.00
>>
>> is this last item clashing with the informal council meeting?
>
> do we have an idea about the time allocated for each slot?
> I think the agenda is quite crammed already, so I won't suggest adding but
> it seems we dont have more than 1 slot for internal discussion (in fact
> presentation).
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
-- 
Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180918/7bee974a/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Wed Sep 19 03:23:29 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 09:23:29 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Meetings during ICANN Barcelona
In-Reply-To: <CAN1qJvAn4NvKK=mWM6mwvs+gXrYKKcCGvPqXToZH2MqBz_T+QQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1ed1e977-db3b-43d4-1b9a-e3d2248d3aab@mixmax.com>
 <CAH5sTh=8ciecVhZA+b8-vS82Jvvvwvmw3iQPLAUCON67EfOyvQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvAn4NvKK=mWM6mwvs+gXrYKKcCGvPqXToZH2MqBz_T+QQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThkVdWn_FXV5CdsGV-ob9tZTJeMYWSA1Ub=eZ0BpBaV_cw@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Farzaneh, for the usual PC meeting itself it will be likely about
the council agenda (depending on topics) and any priority policy topic for
barcelona, I assume EPDP and access. We got 90min only.

Best,

Rafik

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 9:08 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Rafik
>
> Non of the meetings other than ALAC and SSR2 been set. So these are just
> ideas we can juggle, remove or replace. I just wanted to know if the PC
> members been working on something that they don't see on the agenda and
> want it to be added or if they thought am item is not necessary.
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 8:04 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Farzaneh,
>>
>> Thanks for the draft,
>>
>> Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 ? 04:38, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> a ?crit :
>>
>>> Hi everybody
>>>
>>> During Barcelona we will have NCSG open session. At the moment the
>>> agenda looks like this:
>>>
>>> - Introduction
>>> - Reminding ourselves what we do at NCSG (our values/our mission/ our
>>> focus) very short presentation
>>> - Meeting with GNSO board members
>>>
>> maybe agreeing on the topics to be discussed too in addition to what we
>> got for the board-ncsg joint meeting
>> also inviting Avri and possibly other board members if possible
>>
>>> - Meeting with law enforcement
>>>
>> I assume we will talk whois/RDS access?
>>
>>> - Meeting with Bryan Schilling
>>>
>>
>> - Meeting with EPDP leadership (Rafik and Kurt)
>>>
>>  ok
>>
>>> - Meeting with ICANN finance team
>>> - SSR2 17.30
>>> - ALAC 18.00
>>>
>>> is this last item clashing with the informal council meeting?
>>
>> do we have an idea about the time allocated for each slot?
>> I think the agenda is quite crammed already, so I won't suggest adding
>> but it seems we dont have more than 1 slot for internal discussion (in fact
>> presentation).
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
> --
> Farzaneh
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180919/ce715757/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Wed Sep 19 06:38:13 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 12:38:13 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [urgent] Re: Review on the draft Recommendations for
 Managing IDN Variant Top-Level Domains
In-Reply-To: <F1E19972-57D2-421B-92F1-1FE22B178491@benin2point0.org>
References: <36B5FA7A-F69E-4063-B0C7-579D08901FC6@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sThnraO5k+9cz-dLXnis7FURSpUTQ2Y58PCaxO7QkNaUCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmdHT8Tu9Z1FFt68prC8U=HvotfmOnoeLJBUnVsNNtfdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmFsKG3v=pVCsP_HiUFVA0GwVDkAyrOWwYHSdu2FjxJCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvB_7gQttdQ0oD+NE19RdPvGOLkEaQqVWkjWp+kZfabAbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <F1E19972-57D2-421B-92F1-1FE22B178491@benin2point0.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=gRtE1KJgZBaHF59eb41K00BrkcrBcYNGVeYKZ637P0w@mail.gmail.com>

hi all,

all fair questions and concerns, I don't think we elaborated too much in
our draft anyway. I didn't submit and so we can drop this as we already
passed the deadline. While I see that we should respond every time,
we chose to not do so in previous occurrences.

my personal conclusion for the last related IDN comments is that we need
more capacity on that area and having more members following closely and
getting involved on the teams. I know that some are participating with
their individual capacity in several LGR teams (they are by script) and we
can build on that.
I discussed with Farznaeh and thinking we should:
- reach to ICANN staff for some introductory webinars for our members to
build more awareness on IDN on the technical side, policy-related matters.
- identify experts within NCSG membership who can help through webinar too.
an approach that can be applied to other areas.

Best,

Rafik

Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 18:42, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org> a
?crit :

> Hi Farzaneh,
>
> I was part of the drafters' team and I must confess that I did not put too
> much effort on the work since I was also concerned with other Public
> Comments that required an effective attention from me, too.
>
> Not only the question asked and the IDN issues as a whole require a high
> technical knowledge and experience with the subject, but also there was a
> lot of documents to read and a strong background to have before writing
> something. I went through all the docs but I could not answer most of the
> questions with enough confidence within the time slot proposed. If you
> still can, don?t hesitate, go ahead and edit the draft. However; there is
> no issue/problem not answering all the questions?. We can write ?no answer?
> or ?NIHIL?.
>
> As far as not submitting a comment here (in state or not), I must refer to
> Rafik, the policy Chair whose vision is rather to always
> comment/acknowledge on/a calls.
>
> Regarding the questions and in my opinion, 1 is yes, 2a is yes, 2.b is
> possible (but needs further discussions within NCSG) 3 is mostly yes but
> with some nuances to clarify. For 5, I am unable to answer by now (further
> reading and IDN knowledge to gain). Regarding the 6th, what you are
> describing seems to be a valid additional risk, and there may be many
> others to add but with strong rationale (to describe and to simulate their
> impacts)
>
>
> That?s it!
>
> @__f_f__
>
> Best Regards
> ____________________________________
>
> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 18 Sep 2018, at 05:52, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi All
>
> I know we are all overburdened with a lot of work and I thank whoever
> drafted this document. But I think this comment needs further improvement.
> We are not really addressing the issues that the report is asking for.
> I pasted the questions. I am sorry I am of no help, I really don't have
> the time to read carefully but here are my observations:
> 1. I think something pertinent to question 3 and 4 (and I might be wrong)
> is that if they want to again delegate the name of the countries in IDN to
> the cctld managers, these managers should not be allowed to use UDRP
> service providers such as WIPO.  (I don't know how far they go, do they
> delegate  similar names of countries and territories -overreach alert- or
> exact names? I could not figure out)
> Why am I against that? Because even in non IDN ccTLDs we see trademark
> overreach. Amazon has claimed so many domain names that have had
> similarities to Amazon in ccTLDs that Amazon did not even have any business
> at!!! Rest assured that this is going to happen to IDNs as well. Note that
> processes such as WIPO are most of the time only in English.
> If we are defenders of diversity I think this is where we should act!
>
> Anyhow. I might be wrong. As I said it was a cursory review and general
> knowledge.If we cannot elaborate on the questions below, then I think we
> should not submit the comment in its current state.
>
> Questions that were asked:
>
>
>    1. *The rationale for the RZ-LGR requires strictly adhering to the IDN
>    variant label sets defined by the community through the RZ-LGR. Is this a
>    reasonable pre-requisite for implementing IDN Variant TLDs?*
>    2. *Do the proposed recommendations appropriately address the
>    management and implementation of the IDN Variant TLDs?*
>       1. *Do any suggested recommendations need to be changed? Why?*
>       2. *Are any additional recommendations needed?*
>    3. *Does the analysis suitably cover the impact of the recommendations
>    on existing procedures for IDN ccTLDs and IDN gTLDs? Is there alternate
>    analysis for certain cases? Are there any additional impacts on the
>    procedures not identified?*
>    4. *Which (if any) of the recommendations require policy consideration
>    by GNSO and ccNSO, whereas the remaining would only have an impact on
>    procedures?*
>    5. *To prevent the permutation issue which can be introduced by using
>    variant labels, as identified by SSAC, how may the allocated IDN
>    Variant TLD labels be limited? Are the mechanisms suggested in Appendix C
>    appropriate? What other factors may also be relevant?*
>    6. *Are the risks and their mitigation measures sufficiently
>    comprehensive? Are there any additional risks? Should there be different or
>    additional mitigation measures?*
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 8:08 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> hi all,
>>
>> the deadline passed but it is possible to submit. please chime in
>> the draft comment is quite short.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 ? 22:06, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>> ?crit :
>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> please review the draft statement, the deadline for submission is today.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> Le sam. 15 sept. 2018 ? 16:44, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>> ?crit :
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> please review the draft comment
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit.
>>>> the deadline for submission is the 17th September.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> This is another public comment on the IDN for review. It is a brief
>>>> comment but all new suggestions are welcome. The deadline is to the 17th of
>>>> September.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit
>>>>
>>>> @__f_f__
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards
>>>> ____________________________________
>>>>
>>>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>>>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>>>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180919/32b1b1a9/attachment.htm>

From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com  Wed Sep 19 06:54:45 2018
From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 23:54:45 -0400
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [urgent] Re: Review on the draft Recommendations for
 Managing IDN Variant Top-Level Domains
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=gRtE1KJgZBaHF59eb41K00BrkcrBcYNGVeYKZ637P0w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <36B5FA7A-F69E-4063-B0C7-579D08901FC6@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sThnraO5k+9cz-dLXnis7FURSpUTQ2Y58PCaxO7QkNaUCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmdHT8Tu9Z1FFt68prC8U=HvotfmOnoeLJBUnVsNNtfdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sThmFsKG3v=pVCsP_HiUFVA0GwVDkAyrOWwYHSdu2FjxJCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvB_7gQttdQ0oD+NE19RdPvGOLkEaQqVWkjWp+kZfabAbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <F1E19972-57D2-421B-92F1-1FE22B178491@benin2point0.org>
 <CAH5sTh=gRtE1KJgZBaHF59eb41K00BrkcrBcYNGVeYKZ637P0w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN1qJvBGGPK6bU9uaUZXQCM4QMD4rThZw3R8L5_LdOa7e2jH7g@mail.gmail.com>

That's a real shame. I really hope we can find members that follow on these
issues since they directly affect diversity and we can actually do
something about it!

Farzaneh


On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 11:38 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
wrote:

> hi all,
>
> all fair questions and concerns, I don't think we elaborated too much in
> our draft anyway. I didn't submit and so we can drop this as we already
> passed the deadline. While I see that we should respond every time,
> we chose to not do so in previous occurrences.
>
> my personal conclusion for the last related IDN comments is that we need
> more capacity on that area and having more members following closely and
> getting involved on the teams. I know that some are participating with
> their individual capacity in several LGR teams (they are by script) and we
> can build on that.
> I discussed with Farznaeh and thinking we should:
> - reach to ICANN staff for some introductory webinars for our members to
> build more awareness on IDN on the technical side, policy-related matters.
> - identify experts within NCSG membership who can help through webinar
> too.
> an approach that can be applied to other areas.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 18:42, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org> a
> ?crit :
>
>> Hi Farzaneh,
>>
>> I was part of the drafters' team and I must confess that I did not put
>> too much effort on the work since I was also concerned with other Public
>> Comments that required an effective attention from me, too.
>>
>> Not only the question asked and the IDN issues as a whole require a high
>> technical knowledge and experience with the subject, but also there was a
>> lot of documents to read and a strong background to have before writing
>> something. I went through all the docs but I could not answer most of the
>> questions with enough confidence within the time slot proposed. If you
>> still can, don?t hesitate, go ahead and edit the draft. However; there is
>> no issue/problem not answering all the questions?. We can write ?no answer?
>> or ?NIHIL?.
>>
>> As far as not submitting a comment here (in state or not), I must refer
>> to Rafik, the policy Chair whose vision is rather to always
>> comment/acknowledge on/a calls.
>>
>> Regarding the questions and in my opinion, 1 is yes, 2a is yes, 2.b is
>> possible (but needs further discussions within NCSG) 3 is mostly yes but
>> with some nuances to clarify. For 5, I am unable to answer by now (further
>> reading and IDN knowledge to gain). Regarding the 6th, what you are
>> describing seems to be a valid additional risk, and there may be many
>> others to add but with strong rationale (to describe and to simulate their
>> impacts)
>>
>>
>> That?s it!
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 18 Sep 2018, at 05:52, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All
>>
>> I know we are all overburdened with a lot of work and I thank whoever
>> drafted this document. But I think this comment needs further improvement.
>> We are not really addressing the issues that the report is asking for.
>> I pasted the questions. I am sorry I am of no help, I really don't have
>> the time to read carefully but here are my observations:
>> 1. I think something pertinent to question 3 and 4 (and I might be wrong)
>> is that if they want to again delegate the name of the countries in IDN to
>> the cctld managers, these managers should not be allowed to use UDRP
>> service providers such as WIPO.  (I don't know how far they go, do they
>> delegate  similar names of countries and territories -overreach alert- or
>> exact names? I could not figure out)
>> Why am I against that? Because even in non IDN ccTLDs we see trademark
>> overreach. Amazon has claimed so many domain names that have had
>> similarities to Amazon in ccTLDs that Amazon did not even have any business
>> at!!! Rest assured that this is going to happen to IDNs as well. Note that
>> processes such as WIPO are most of the time only in English.
>> If we are defenders of diversity I think this is where we should act!
>>
>> Anyhow. I might be wrong. As I said it was a cursory review and general
>> knowledge.If we cannot elaborate on the questions below, then I think we
>> should not submit the comment in its current state.
>>
>> Questions that were asked:
>>
>>
>>    1. *The rationale for the RZ-LGR requires strictly adhering to the
>>    IDN variant label sets defined by the community through the RZ-LGR. Is this
>>    a reasonable pre-requisite for implementing IDN Variant TLDs?*
>>    2. *Do the proposed recommendations appropriately address the
>>    management and implementation of the IDN Variant TLDs?*
>>       1. *Do any suggested recommendations need to be changed? Why?*
>>       2. *Are any additional recommendations needed?*
>>    3. *Does the analysis suitably cover the impact of the
>>    recommendations on existing procedures for IDN ccTLDs and IDN gTLDs? Is
>>    there alternate analysis for certain cases? Are there any additional
>>    impacts on the procedures not identified?*
>>    4. *Which (if any) of the recommendations require policy
>>    consideration by GNSO and ccNSO, whereas the remaining would only have an
>>    impact on procedures?*
>>    5. *To prevent the permutation issue which can be introduced by using
>>    variant labels, as identified by SSAC, how may the allocated IDN
>>    Variant TLD labels be limited? Are the mechanisms suggested in Appendix C
>>    appropriate? What other factors may also be relevant?*
>>    6. *Are the risks and their mitigation measures sufficiently
>>    comprehensive? Are there any additional risks? Should there be different or
>>    additional mitigation measures?*
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 8:08 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> the deadline passed but it is possible to submit. please chime in
>>> the draft comment is quite short.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 ? 22:06, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>> ?crit :
>>>
>>>> hi all,
>>>>
>>>> please review the draft statement, the deadline for submission is today.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>> Le sam. 15 sept. 2018 ? 16:44, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>>> ?crit :
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> please review the draft comment
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit.
>>>>> the deadline for submission is the 17th September.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>
>>>>> This is another public comment on the IDN for review. It is a brief
>>>>> comment but all new suggestions are welcome. The deadline is to the 17th of
>>>>> September.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit
>>>>>
>>>>> @__f_f__
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>> ____________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>>>>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>>>>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20180918/4e692ca4/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Thu Sep 20 04:25:46 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:25:46 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Draft Agenda for NCSG Monthly Policy Call 21th September
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=dibp_WPUiwuPGYx-3skb_H12u6Be4YMAz65C6HndyVw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I am sharing the draft agenda for our tomorrow policy call. The call is
held earlier than usual since there is the EPDP F2F meeting next week.
no big change in the agenda while I think we will have more time to discuss
EPDP under III, pending another NCSG EPDP call and update coming from reps
to EPDP team.

I. Roll call/Introduction
II. GNSO Council Call Preparation

   - Council agenda:
*https://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-27sep18-en.pdf
   <https://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-27sep18-en.pdf>*

III. Policy Update
- Planning public comments responses:
https://www.icann.org/public-comments#open-public  & list of volunteers
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2018
- Policy topics:
  * EPDP update from NCSG representatives
  * PDPs & Review Teams Update

IV. Misc
   - Barcelona ICANN meeting

Best Regards,

Rafik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180920/cb609cae/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Sun Sep 23 21:44:08 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 03:44:08 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>

hi all,

this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review

Best Regards,

Rafik


Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> hi all,
>
> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go
> through the comment.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report on
> the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Overarching
> Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).
>
> Elsa and I are still working on this document
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit>
> so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and
> the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this
> share this with the NCSG list soon.
>
> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is very
> much welcome.
>
> Best,
> Bruna and Elsa
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180924/1d4406ec/attachment.htm>

From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com  Mon Sep 24 03:34:31 2018
From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii)
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2018 17:34:31 -0700
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>

I had a look at the document. I abstain from approving it and here are my
reasons:

While I believe in free market, innovation and everything else that Robin
and others claim should be in registries business model and they think
closed registries can bring that about and I believe that top level domain
names are property after allocation, I think having closed generics and
restricted brand registries by default can lead to the politicization of
the domain space even further. I don't even agree with having criteria set
by ICANN for community TLDs.  I believe it might have made sense to support
closed generics then, but the result is clear. We now have a much stronger
GAC to deal with in Geo names, we have public interest related to each and
every topic we discuss. And saying not to conflate trade mark with closed
generic without providing a reason how they are different (I have read
emails, transcripts etc) does not make sense to me.

I support not allowing closed generics but allowing any other business
model in registries in favor of not politicizing the domain space. It might
be too late. but that is my opinion.






Farzaneh


On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
wrote:

> hi all,
>
> this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> hi all,
>>
>> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go
>> through the comment.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
>> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report on
>> the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Overarching
>> Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).
>>
>> Elsa and I are still working on this document
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit>
>> so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and
>> the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this
>> share this with the NCSG list soon.
>>
>> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is very
>> much welcome.
>>
>> Best,
>> Bruna and Elsa
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180923/55a2ace1/attachment.htm>

From icann at ferdeline.com  Mon Sep 24 06:43:54 2018
From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 03:43:54 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CDF6B647-4DCF-419D-90A5-52BEEBFFA8A6@ferdeline.com>

A lot of good work has gone into this comment, so thank you to those involved in drafting it. However I think it is not yet ready for submission. In the comments there have been some serious issues raised which I think need a response. I agree that there should be consistency in our comments, so if the position being taken today is different to the position that the NCSG has taken in the past, we need to talk about what has changed and why.

Best wishes, Ayden

> On 23 Sep 2018, at 17:34, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> I had a look at the document. I abstain from approving it and here are my reasons:
>
> While I believe in free market, innovation and everything else that Robin and others claim should be in registries business model and they think closed registries can bring that about and I believe that top level domain names are property after allocation, I think having closed generics and restricted brand registries by default can lead to the politicization of the domain space even further. I don't even agree with having criteria set by ICANN for community TLDs.  I believe it might have made sense to support closed generics then, but the result is clear. We now have a much stronger GAC to deal with in Geo names, we have public interest related to each and every topic we discuss. And saying not to conflate trade mark with closed generic without providing a reason how they are different (I have read emails, transcripts etc) does not make sense to me.
>
> I support not allowing closed generics but allowing any other business model in registries in favor of not politicizing the domain space. It might be too late. but that is my opinion.
>
> Farzaneh
>
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> hi all,
>>
>> this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a ?crit :
>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go through the comment.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
>>> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
>>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
>>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).
>>>
>>> Elsa and I are still working on [this document](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit) so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this share this with the NCSG list soon.
>>>
>>> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is very much welcome.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Bruna and Elsa
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180924/49d4a266/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Mon Sep 24 18:41:55 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 00:41:55 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CDF6B647-4DCF-419D-90A5-52BEEBFFA8A6@ferdeline.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CDF6B647-4DCF-419D-90A5-52BEEBFFA8A6@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=GN7S-q1Ztgm+U1aTMrk49h-5qDoKmEerqMsneB9V+sA@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks all for the comment
the deadline for submission s the 26th Sept and not clear we can get some
extension. I am still checking on that front.
as the topic is contentious, one way is to take it out from the draft and
comment separately having a proper discussion within NCSG, that is not a
perfect option but at least to ensure that we cover the other areas of the
public comment where there is no disagreement.
the comment still needs to be tidied up and finalized.

Best,

Rafik
Le lun. 24 sept. 2018 ? 12:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
?crit :

> A lot of good work has gone into this comment, so thank you to those
> involved in drafting it. However I think it is not yet ready for
> submission. In the comments there have been some serious issues raised
> which I think need a response. I agree that there should be consistency in
> our comments, so if the position being taken today is different to the
> position that the NCSG has taken in the past, we need to talk about what
> has changed and why.
>
> Best wishes, Ayden
>
> On 23 Sep 2018, at 17:34, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> I had a look at the document. I abstain from approving it and here are my
> reasons:
>
> While I believe in free market, innovation and everything else that Robin
> and others claim should be in registries business model and they think
> closed registries can bring that about and I believe that top level domain
> names are property after allocation, I think having closed generics and
> restricted brand registries by default can lead to the politicization of
> the domain space even further. I don't even agree with having criteria set
> by ICANN for community TLDs.  I believe it might have made sense to support
> closed generics then, but the result is clear. We now have a much stronger
> GAC to deal with in Geo names, we have public interest related to each and
> every topic we discuss. And saying not to conflate trade mark with closed
> generic without providing a reason how they are different (I have read
> emails, transcripts etc) does not make sense to me.
>
> I support not allowing closed generics but allowing any other business
> model in registries in favor of not politicizing the domain space. It might
> be too late. but that is my opinion.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> hi all,
>>
>> this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>> ?crit :
>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go
>>> through the comment.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
>>> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
>>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
>>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report
>>> on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process
>>> (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).
>>>
>>> Elsa and I are still working on this document
>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit>
>>> so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and
>>> the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this
>>> share this with the NCSG list soon.
>>>
>>> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is
>>> very much welcome.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Bruna and Elsa
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180925/b6f40fa8/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Wed Sep 26 08:52:05 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 14:52:05 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=GN7S-q1Ztgm+U1aTMrk49h-5qDoKmEerqMsneB9V+sA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CDF6B647-4DCF-419D-90A5-52BEEBFFA8A6@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=GN7S-q1Ztgm+U1aTMrk49h-5qDoKmEerqMsneB9V+sA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=XUD-uo1RS-mDTqKN596LCaLW+eMLkXqFtJrfCfjwkYA@mail.gmail.com>

hi all,

I worked on this clean version (there are still some comments)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit
the contentions parts were removed and to be discussed later/

Best,

Rafik
Le mar. 25 sept. 2018 ? 00:41, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
?crit :

> Thanks all for the comment
> the deadline for submission s the 26th Sept and not clear we can get some
> extension. I am still checking on that front.
> as the topic is contentious, one way is to take it out from the draft and
> comment separately having a proper discussion within NCSG, that is not a
> perfect option but at least to ensure that we cover the other areas of the
> public comment where there is no disagreement.
> the comment still needs to be tidied up and finalized.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
> Le lun. 24 sept. 2018 ? 12:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> A lot of good work has gone into this comment, so thank you to those
>> involved in drafting it. However I think it is not yet ready for
>> submission. In the comments there have been some serious issues raised
>> which I think need a response. I agree that there should be consistency in
>> our comments, so if the position being taken today is different to the
>> position that the NCSG has taken in the past, we need to talk about what
>> has changed and why.
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>
>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 17:34, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I had a look at the document. I abstain from approving it and here are my
>> reasons:
>>
>> While I believe in free market, innovation and everything else that Robin
>> and others claim should be in registries business model and they think
>> closed registries can bring that about and I believe that top level domain
>> names are property after allocation, I think having closed generics and
>> restricted brand registries by default can lead to the politicization of
>> the domain space even further. I don't even agree with having criteria set
>> by ICANN for community TLDs.  I believe it might have made sense to support
>> closed generics then, but the result is clear. We now have a much stronger
>> GAC to deal with in Geo names, we have public interest related to each and
>> every topic we discuss. And saying not to conflate trade mark with closed
>> generic without providing a reason how they are different (I have read
>> emails, transcripts etc) does not make sense to me.
>>
>> I support not allowing closed generics but allowing any other business
>> model in registries in favor of not politicizing the domain space. It might
>> be too late. but that is my opinion.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>> ?crit :
>>>
>>>> hi all,
>>>>
>>>> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go
>>>> through the comment.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
>>>> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
>>>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
>>>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report
>>>> on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process
>>>> (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).
>>>>
>>>> Elsa and I are still working on this document
>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit>
>>>> so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and
>>>> the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this
>>>> share this with the NCSG list soon.
>>>>
>>>> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is
>>>> very much welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Bruna and Elsa
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20180926/2c5ef0aa/attachment.htm>

From mpsilvavalent at gmail.com  Thu Sep 27 00:45:48 2018
From: mpsilvavalent at gmail.com (Martin Pablo Silva Valent)
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 18:45:48 -0300
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=XUD-uo1RS-mDTqKN596LCaLW+eMLkXqFtJrfCfjwkYA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CDF6B647-4DCF-419D-90A5-52BEEBFFA8A6@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=GN7S-q1Ztgm+U1aTMrk49h-5qDoKmEerqMsneB9V+sA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=XUD-uo1RS-mDTqKN596LCaLW+eMLkXqFtJrfCfjwkYA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJjnsDGoZkuy8xs4EZ83MZYNQHX264JZiCtjgQCz5VgtCjT2fA@mail.gmail.com>

Given the deadline, I give my support to move it forward.

Best,
Martin

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 02:52 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> hi all,
>
> I worked on this clean version (there are still some comments)
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit
> the contentions parts were removed and to be discussed later/
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
> Le mar. 25 sept. 2018 ? 00:41, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
> ?crit :
>
>> Thanks all for the comment
>> the deadline for submission s the 26th Sept and not clear we can get some
>> extension. I am still checking on that front.
>> as the topic is contentious, one way is to take it out from the draft and
>> comment separately having a proper discussion within NCSG, that is not a
>> perfect option but at least to ensure that we cover the other areas of the
>> public comment where there is no disagreement.
>> the comment still needs to be tidied up and finalized.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>> Le lun. 24 sept. 2018 ? 12:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
>> ?crit :
>>
>>> A lot of good work has gone into this comment, so thank you to those
>>> involved in drafting it. However I think it is not yet ready for
>>> submission. In the comments there have been some serious issues raised
>>> which I think need a response. I agree that there should be consistency in
>>> our comments, so if the position being taken today is different to the
>>> position that the NCSG has taken in the past, we need to talk about what
>>> has changed and why.
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>
>>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 17:34, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I had a look at the document. I abstain from approving it and here are
>>> my reasons:
>>>
>>> While I believe in free market, innovation and everything else that
>>> Robin and others claim should be in registries business model and they
>>> think closed registries can bring that about and I believe that top level
>>> domain names are property after allocation, I think having closed generics
>>> and restricted brand registries by default can lead to the politicization
>>> of the domain space even further. I don't even agree with having criteria
>>> set by ICANN for community TLDs.  I believe it might have made sense to
>>> support closed generics then, but the result is clear. We now have a much
>>> stronger GAC to deal with in Geo names, we have public interest related to
>>> each and every topic we discuss. And saying not to conflate trade mark with
>>> closed generic without providing a reason how they are different (I have
>>> read emails, transcripts etc) does not make sense to me.
>>>
>>> I support not allowing closed generics but allowing any other business
>>> model in registries in favor of not politicizing the domain space. It might
>>> be too late. but that is my opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hi all,
>>>>
>>>> this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>>> ?crit :
>>>>
>>>>> hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go
>>>>> through the comment.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>>> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
>>>>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
>>>>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report
>>>>> on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process
>>>>> (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).
>>>>>
>>>>> Elsa and I are still working on this document
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit>
>>>>> so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and
>>>>> the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this
>>>>> share this with the NCSG list soon.
>>>>>
>>>>> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is
>>>>> very much welcome.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Bruna and Elsa
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20180926/1092f09b/attachment.htm>

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Thu Sep 27 04:55:37 2018
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 10:55:37 +0900
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CAJjnsDGoZkuy8xs4EZ83MZYNQHX264JZiCtjgQCz5VgtCjT2fA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CDF6B647-4DCF-419D-90A5-52BEEBFFA8A6@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=GN7S-q1Ztgm+U1aTMrk49h-5qDoKmEerqMsneB9V+sA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=XUD-uo1RS-mDTqKN596LCaLW+eMLkXqFtJrfCfjwkYA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJjnsDGoZkuy8xs4EZ83MZYNQHX264JZiCtjgQCz5VgtCjT2fA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH5sTh=7M2SGMURBm6fNoEsERauZ0o+TaeY0XTj8QDwYjAhZUQ@mail.gmail.com>

thanks,
as we worked on cleaning up and reformatting the document today, while it
is far from perfect and many things can be improved, I will submit the
draft tonight (PST) unless there is a strong objection.
there are a few topics where there were disagreements that should be
brought up to list for further discussion and build NCSG positions. That
can be also a good opportunity to educate the membership on those topics.
submitting a public comment is not enough and we got to have more
representation in the WG itself in the different tracks to be effective.
maybe a good opportunity to get a few NCSG members to join and participate
in this phase since the WG asked for a lot of input and questions, and so
still working on the recommendations.

Best,

Rafik

Le jeu. 27 sept. 2018 ? 06:46, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> a ?crit :

> Given the deadline, I give my support to move it forward.
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 02:52 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> hi all,
>>
>> I worked on this clean version (there are still some comments)
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit
>> the contentions parts were removed and to be discussed later/
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>> Le mar. 25 sept. 2018 ? 00:41, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>> ?crit :
>>
>>> Thanks all for the comment
>>> the deadline for submission s the 26th Sept and not clear we can get
>>> some extension. I am still checking on that front.
>>> as the topic is contentious, one way is to take it out from the draft
>>> and comment separately having a proper discussion within NCSG, that is not
>>> a perfect option but at least to ensure that we cover the other areas of
>>> the public comment where there is no disagreement.
>>> the comment still needs to be tidied up and finalized.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>> Le lun. 24 sept. 2018 ? 12:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> a
>>> ?crit :
>>>
>>>> A lot of good work has gone into this comment, so thank you to those
>>>> involved in drafting it. However I think it is not yet ready for
>>>> submission. In the comments there have been some serious issues raised
>>>> which I think need a response. I agree that there should be consistency in
>>>> our comments, so if the position being taken today is different to the
>>>> position that the NCSG has taken in the past, we need to talk about what
>>>> has changed and why.
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>>>
>>>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 17:34, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I had a look at the document. I abstain from approving it and here are
>>>> my reasons:
>>>>
>>>> While I believe in free market, innovation and everything else that
>>>> Robin and others claim should be in registries business model and they
>>>> think closed registries can bring that about and I believe that top level
>>>> domain names are property after allocation, I think having closed generics
>>>> and restricted brand registries by default can lead to the politicization
>>>> of the domain space even further. I don't even agree with having criteria
>>>> set by ICANN for community TLDs.  I believe it might have made sense to
>>>> support closed generics then, but the result is clear. We now have a much
>>>> stronger GAC to deal with in Geo names, we have public interest related to
>>>> each and every topic we discuss. And saying not to conflate trade mark with
>>>> closed generic without providing a reason how they are different (I have
>>>> read emails, transcripts etc) does not make sense to me.
>>>>
>>>> I support not allowing closed generics but allowing any other business
>>>> model in registries in favor of not politicizing the domain space. It might
>>>> be too late. but that is my opinion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Farzaneh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>>> a ?crit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go
>>>>>> through the comment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>>>> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
>>>>>> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
>>>>>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
>>>>>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial
>>>>>> Report on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process
>>>>>> (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Elsa and I are still working on this document
>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit>
>>>>>> so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and
>>>>>> the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this
>>>>>> share this with the NCSG list soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is
>>>>>> very much welcome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Bruna and Elsa
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/20180927/30423dcc/attachment.htm>

From farell at benin2point0.org  Thu Sep 27 13:54:14 2018
From: farell at benin2point0.org (Farell FOLLY)
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:54:14 +0800
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sTh=GN7S-q1Ztgm+U1aTMrk49h-5qDoKmEerqMsneB9V+sA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CDF6B647-4DCF-419D-90A5-52BEEBFFA8A6@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=GN7S-q1Ztgm+U1aTMrk49h-5qDoKmEerqMsneB9V+sA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00047927-71B9-4EFB-8054-E9561BEEC52C@benin2point0.org>

Dear Rafik,

I have no comment.

@__f_f__

Best Regards
____________________________________

(Ekue) Farell FOLLY
NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
linkedin.com/in/farellf 






> On 24 Sep 2018, at 23:41, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> 
> Thanks all for the comment
> the deadline for submission s the 26th Sept and not clear we can get some extension. I am still checking on that front.
> as the topic is contentious, one way is to take it out from the draft and comment separately having a proper discussion within NCSG, that is not a perfect option but at least to ensure that we cover the other areas of the public comment where there is no disagreement.
> the comment still needs to be tidied up and finalized.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rafik
> Le lun. 24 sept. 2018 ? 12:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> a ?crit :
> A lot of good work has gone into this comment, so thank you to those involved in drafting it. However I think it is not yet ready for submission. In the comments there have been some serious issues raised which I think need a response. I agree that there should be consistency in our comments, so if the position being taken today is different to the position that the NCSG has taken in the past, we need to talk about what has changed and why.
> 
> Best wishes, Ayden
> 
>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 17:34, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM <mailto:farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM>> wrote:
>> 
>> I had a look at the document. I abstain from approving it and here are my reasons:
>> 
>> While I believe in free market, innovation and everything else that Robin and others claim should be in registries business model and they think closed registries can bring that about and I believe that top level domain names are property after allocation, I think having closed generics and restricted brand registries by default can lead to the politicization of the domain space even further. I don't even agree with having criteria set by ICANN for community TLDs.  I believe it might have made sense to support closed generics then, but the result is clear. We now have a much stronger GAC to deal with in Geo names, we have public interest related to each and every topic we discuss. And saying not to conflate trade mark with closed generic without providing a reason how they are different (I have read emails, transcripts etc) does not make sense to me. 
>> 
>> I support not allowing closed generics but allowing any other business model in registries in favor of not politicizing the domain space. It might be too late. but that is my opinion.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Farzaneh
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> hi all,
>> 
>> this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> 
>> Rafik
>> 
>> 
>> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> a ?crit :
>> hi all,
>> 
>> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go through the comment.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Rafik
>> 
>> 
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com <mailto:bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>>
>> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>>
>> 
>> 
>> Dear all, 
>> 
>> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4). 
>> 
>> Elsa and I are still working on this document <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit> so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this share this with the NCSG list soon. 
>> 
>> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is very much welcome. 
>> 
>> Best, 
>> Bruna and Elsa 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180927/517443f1/attachment.htm>

From arsenebaguma at gmail.com  Thu Sep 27 14:01:45 2018
From: arsenebaguma at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne_Tungali?=)
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 11:01:45 +0000
Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report
 SubPro
In-Reply-To: <00047927-71B9-4EFB-8054-E9561BEEC52C@benin2point0.org>
References: <CADAEEV23EXU4BxJReJWti5ya8z+p-=baLRG9s2EykjcWUoaacQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=T8LRp5C0OO+5eF7q_zD4UyH-5EFvVO5dDBndnP8-cKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH5sTh=xXVif2KizOjt21LPpo6CrvKSCLu45WB7ukhkYEDY_Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN1qJvDRiMR11=pHXuBVMWNQUsKU+iAL4XVNU7YgXFskfPbkow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CDF6B647-4DCF-419D-90A5-52BEEBFFA8A6@ferdeline.com>
 <CAH5sTh=GN7S-q1Ztgm+U1aTMrk49h-5qDoKmEerqMsneB9V+sA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00047927-71B9-4EFB-8054-E9561BEEC52C@benin2point0.org>
Message-ID: <CABDXvWomc_4nRkfX0Q=vYD4sK_=PzSoKSFrTEPnX3wM_nM27ag@mail.gmail.com>

I have read through the comment and if the group is okay with it, i
will not refrain its submission since I did not follow the work of
this working group properly.

2018-09-27 10:54 UTC, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>:
> Dear Rafik,
>
> I have no comment.
>
> @__f_f__
>
> Best Regards
> ____________________________________
>
> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> On 24 Sep 2018, at 23:41, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks all for the comment
>> the deadline for submission s the 26th Sept and not clear we can get some
>> extension. I am still checking on that front.
>> as the topic is contentious, one way is to take it out from the draft and
>> comment separately having a proper discussion within NCSG, that is not a
>> perfect option but at least to ensure that we cover the other areas of the
>> public comment where there is no disagreement.
>> the comment still needs to be tidied up and finalized.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>> Le lun. 24 sept. 2018 ? 12:44, Ayden F?rdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> a ?crit :
>> A lot of good work has gone into this comment, so thank you to those
>> involved in drafting it. However I think it is not yet ready for
>> submission. In the comments there have been some serious issues raised
>> which I think need a response. I agree that there should be consistency in
>> our comments, so if the position being taken today is different to the
>> position that the NCSG has taken in the past, we need to talk about what
>> has changed and why.
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>
>>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 17:34, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM
>>> <mailto:farzaneh.badii at GMAIL.COM>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I had a look at the document. I abstain from approving it and here are my
>>> reasons:
>>>
>>> While I believe in free market, innovation and everything else that Robin
>>> and others claim should be in registries business model and they think
>>> closed registries can bring that about and I believe that top level
>>> domain names are property after allocation, I think having closed
>>> generics and restricted brand registries by default can lead to the
>>> politicization of the domain space even further. I don't even agree with
>>> having criteria set by ICANN for community TLDs.  I believe it might have
>>> made sense to support closed generics then, but the result is clear. We
>>> now have a much stronger GAC to deal with in Geo names, we have public
>>> interest related to each and every topic we discuss. And saying not to
>>> conflate trade mark with closed generic without providing a reason how
>>> they are different (I have read emails, transcripts etc) does not make
>>> sense to me.
>>>
>>> I support not allowing closed generics but allowing any other business
>>> model in registries in favor of not politicizing the domain space. It
>>> might be too late. but that is my opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> this is a reminder about the subsequent procedures comment review
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 10:23, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> a ?crit :
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> the draft was shared in NCSG list for review. asking PC members to go
>>> through the comment.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> From: Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>>
>>> Date: mar. 18 sept. 2018 ? 09:57
>>> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Draft Input to the Initial Report SubPro
>>> To: <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu
>>> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Please find the initial draft of the NCSG Input to the Initial Report on
>>> the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process
>>> (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4).
>>>
>>> Elsa and I are still working on this document
>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SxCa4cn-NEiS_tea-jUP02DSG6IEzf_O4_MBPLUtxZs/edit>
>>> so its not yet finalized but considered the importance of the subject and
>>> the upcoming deadline for submission (sep 26th) we thought we should this
>>> share this with the NCSG list soon.
>>>
>>> We will be finalizing this comment during the week and your input is very
>>> much welcome.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Bruna and Elsa
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>


-- 
------------------------
**Ars?ne Tungali* <http://about.me/ArseneTungali>*
Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international
<http://www.rudiinternational.org>*,
CEO,* Smart Services Sarl <https://www.smart-kitoko.com/>*, *Mabingwa Forum
<http://www.mabingwa-forum.com>*
Tel: +243 993810967
GPG: 523644A0
*Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo*

2015 Mandela Washington Felllow
<http://tungali.blogspot.com/2015/06/selected-for-2015-mandela-washington.html>
(YALI) - ISOC Ambassador (IGF Brazil
<http://www.internetsociety.org/what-we-do/education-and-leadership-programmes/next-generation-leaders/igf-ambassadors-programme/Past-Ambassadors>
& Mexico
<http://www.internetsociety.org/what-we-do/education-and-leadership-programmes/next-generation-leaders/Current-Ambassadors>)
- AFRISIG 2016 <http://afrisig.org/afrisig-2016/class-of-2016/> - Blogger
<http://tungali.blogspot.com> - ICANN's GNSO Council
<https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/gnso-council.htm> Member. AFRINIC Fellow (
Mauritius
<http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1907-afrinic-25-fellowship-winners>)*
- *IGFSA Member <http://www.igfsa.org/> - Internet Governance - Internet
Freedom.

Check the *2016 State of Internet Freedom in DRC* report (English
<http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=234>) and (French
<http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=242>)