<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Texto sem Formatação Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Texto de balão Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.TextosemFormataoChar
{mso-style-name:"Texto sem Formatação Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Texto sem Formatação";
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
span.TextodebaloChar
{mso-style-name:"Texto de balão Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Texto de balão";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="PT-BR" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US">Dear CCWG colleagues,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US">Notwithstanding the lack of consensus on recommendation 11 of the 3<sup>rd</sup> draft report, I think it is beneficial to our discussion to remind ourselves of GAC's
<b><u>consensus text</u></b> for Stress Test 18, which is part of the ICANN 54 GAC's Communiqué (Dublin):<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US">"The discussions on Stress Test 18 have helped the GAC to have a better understanding of the different views on the issue. In assessing the different rationales presented so far related to Stress Test 18, the GAC
considered:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US">• The need that each and every Advisory Committee ensures that the advice provided is clear and reflects the consensus view of the Committee;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US">• The need that each and every Advisory Committee should preserve its own autonomy in its definition of consensus;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US">• The value the Board attributes to receiving consensus advice;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US">• The recommendation of the BGRI WG, as reiterated by the ATRT2, to set the threshold for the ICANN Board to reject GAC advice to a 2/3 majority voting, consistent with the threshold established for rejection of
ccNSO and GNSO PDP recommendations. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><i><span lang="EN-US">In view of the above, having considered concerns expressed by various parties, the GAC agreed to further work on the issue of Stress Test 18, and to submit any further input to the CCWG taking into account
the timelines of the CCWG. GAC Members will continue to work within the CCWG to finalise the proposal for enhancing ICANN accountability."</span></i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US">Kind regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Secretário Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Divisão da Sociedade da Informação (DI)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Ministério das Relações Exteriores - Brasil<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">T: + 55 61 2030-6609<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Secretary Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Division of Information Society (DI)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Ministry of External Relations - Brazil<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">T: + 55 61 2030-6609<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">-----Mensagem original-----<br>
De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Em nome de Kavouss Arasteh<br>
Enviada em: terça-feira, 26 de janeiro de 2016 15:36<br>
Para: Thomas Rickert<br>
Cc: ACCT-Staff; Accountability Cross Community<br>
Assunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: GAC views on draft recommendations of the third draft proposal of the CCWG-accountability</span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Yes<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Lack ok consensus on such an issue so delicate like Stress Test 18 and Rec. 11 in GAC is understandable thus we could make our best to finalise the Rec.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Regards<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Kavouss <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Sent from my iPhone<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">On 26 Jan 2016, at 18:12, Thomas Rickert <<a href="mailto:rickert@anwaelte.de"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">rickert@anwaelte.de</span></a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> All,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Please note the GAC did not reject any of our recommendations, including recommendation 11. That is great news.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Kind regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Thomas<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ---<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> rickert.net<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Am 26.01.2016 um 16:15 schrieb Phil Corwin <<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">psc@vlaw-dc.com</span></a>>:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> When Leon’s email arrived last night the first thing I did after opening the attachment was scroll to Recommendation 11, because that is the one that most directly speaks to the GAC’s post-transition influence
upon ICANN policy decisions, and also the one that has engendered the most controversy (finding almost no support, e.g., among members of the GNSO).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> So I was of course astounded to see “There is no consensus within the GAC to adopt a formal position on this Recommendation”. That’s it, without even any further exposition on the divergent views within
the GAC to provide a minimum of guidance.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> This is of course a reminder of how difficult it is for the GAC to render advice under the current operating procedure of consensus (and why in the future the GAC might be tempted to lower or redefine that
standard to bolster its input). It is also a sharp reminder that governmental representatives engaging in the CCWG’s process are expressing only the view of their nation and not any overall GAC position.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> As for how the CCWG should proceed given that the GAC has no position on rec. 11, well given that it has missed its chance to register either support, objection, or recommendations for modification I think
CCWG has no choice but to proceed based upon input from other Chartering Organizations, because waiting on the GAC is not feasible under the current timeline however it is measured.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Virtualaw LLC<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> 1155 F Street, NW<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Suite 1050<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Washington, DC 20004<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> 202-559-8597/Direct<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> 202-559-8750/Fax<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> 202-255-6172/cell<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Twitter: @VlawDC<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> From: <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
<span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</span></a> [<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</span></a>]
On Behalf Of Paul Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 9:33 AM<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> To: 'León Felipe Sánchez Ambía'; 'Accountability Cross Community'<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Cc: 'ACCT-Staff'<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: GAC views on draft recommendations of the third draft proposal of the CCWG-accountability<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> I know that the Annex 11 is on for discussion today. Is it just me or does it seem to others near impossible to reach a conclusion on Annex 11 without the GAC’s input? Even if, in the end, we wind up
not accepting their position I would have thought it essential to do so knowing what that position is.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Or is it the case that we are going to drive ahead and just proceed without the GAC because they can’t meet our timeline of consideration?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Paul<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Paul Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com">
<span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</span></a> <<a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com</span></a>>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> O: +1 (202) 547-0660<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> M: +1 (202) 329-9650<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Link to my PGP Key <<a href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9</span></a>>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <image001.png> <<a href="http://www.rsaconference.com/events/us16?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=speakers-us2016"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">http://www.rsaconference.com/events/us16?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=speakers-us2016</span></a>>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> From: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía [<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</span></a>]
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 8:15 PM<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> To: Accountability Cross Community <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</span></a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Cc: ACCT-Staff <<a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">acct-staff@icann.org</span></a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: GAC views on draft recommendations of the third draft proposal of the CCWG-accountability<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Dear all,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> I am forwarding the GAC’s views on the draft recommendations of our third draft proposal.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Best regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> León<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Inicio del mensaje reenviado:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> De: <<a href="mailto:Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch</span></a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Asunto: GAC views on draft recommendations of the third draft proposal of the CCWG-accountability<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Fecha: 25 de enero de 2016, 6:50:14 p.m. GMT-6<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Para: <<a href="mailto:thomas@rickert.net"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">thomas@rickert.net</span></a>>, <<a href="mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">mathieu.weill@afnic.fr</span></a>>,
<<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</span></a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Cc: <<a href="mailto:gac@icann.org"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">gac@icann.org</span></a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Dear Co-Chairs<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Please find attached the GAC’s views on the draft recommendations of the third draft proposal of the CCWG Accountability.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Best regards<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Thomas<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Thomas Schneider<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Chair<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> No virus found in this message.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com">
<span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">www.avg.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11316 - Release Date: 01/03/16<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Internal Virus Database is out of date.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> _______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
<span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">
<span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> _______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
<span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">
<span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>