[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER Re: Please participate - survey re. whether ICANN Org should be able to apply for funds

Carolina Caeiro carolina at lacnic.net
Wed Aug 23 20:24:19 UTC 2017


Dear all,

Are there any problems with re-opening the survey for a couple extra 
hours, say 10:00PM UTC? I was awaiting for some feedback and missed the 
deadline for some 20 minutes. I think this should still give us 
sufficient time for review ahead of tomorrow's meeting and some other 
group members might be in a similar situation?

Many thanks,

Carolina


El 23/8/17 a las 15:14, Marika Konings escribió:
>
> Please note that this poll has now been closed. You are encouraged to 
> review the results ahead of tomorrow’s meeting here: 
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-K3MK9MY5/.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> *From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Marika 
> Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> *Date: *Monday, August 21, 2017 at 12:03
> *To: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
> *Subject: *[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] REMINDER Re: Please participate - 
> survey re. whether ICANN Org should be able to apply for funds
>
> Reminder – please participate in the poll if you have not done so yet.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> *From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Marika 
> Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> *Date: *Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 06:12
> *To: *Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>, 'Seun Ojedeji' 
> <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez at icann.org>
> *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
> *Subject: *[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Please participate - survey re. 
> whether ICANN Org should be able to apply for funds
>
> Jonathan, thank you for your suggestion and others for chiming in. In 
> consultation with the leadership team, staff has put together a short 
> survey to obtain CCWG input on the questions you have outlined below 
> which will hopefully help inform the CCWG deliberations on this topic. 
> To participate in the survey, please go to 
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/HRRV93W[surveymonkey.com] 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_r_HRRV93W&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=_T1cLFkwn8kLi5jr9uCCI3cTUNSqX0Cv-wIVN_Xqpqc&s=YWSOX8e-LtaTRwYSpnCY2VJtJ6ujbtxMW5EzSdyanhQ&e=>. 
>
>
> You are requested to provide your input by Wednesday 23 August at 
> 18.00 UTC at the latest.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Marika
>
> *From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Jonathan 
> Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
> *Organization: *Afilias
> *Reply-To: *Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
> *Date: *Friday, August 11, 2017 at 03:11
> *To: *'Seun Ojedeji' <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>, "Xavier J. Calvez" 
> <xavier.calvez at icann.org>
> *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from 
> today's CCWG-AP meeting
>
> All,
>
> A couple of thoughts on this topic.
>
> On the subject of whether or not ICANN should have a 12 month 
> operating expense reserve in place.
>
> Agreed that it seems to be common practice in the not for profit sector.
>
> Whether or not it should be the case for ICANN is an interesting 
> question, but agreed, not one for this CWG.
>
> In any event, Xavier has clarified that the current policy is that the 
> level of operating reserve should be 12 months.
>
> My understanding of the question for this group is not whether or not 
> we would sanction the (auction fund) money being used to top up the 
> reserves.
>
> But rather, whether or not we would like to see rules in place that 
> sanction ICANN (the organisation) applying for auction funds.
>
> In evaluating that question of ICANN the organisation as a prospective 
> applicant, a use or test case for that consideration is ICANN applying 
> (under the same rules as anyone else) for auction funds to top up the 
> ICANN reserve funds.
>
> My personal view is that ICANN should be demonstrating a commitment to 
> fulfilling its current policy (to have in place a 12 month reserve) by 
> budgeting an operating surplus to build that reserve.
>
> In addition (independently of this CWG), ICANN should review its 
> current policy on reserve funds.
>
> If these two criteria were met, it would make me personaly much more 
> sympathetic to potentially topping up reserve funds (to some extent) 
> with auction funds.
>
> At the risk of being repetitive, it seems to me that the question for 
> this CWG remains:
>
>   * Whether or not ICANN the Organisation should be permitted to apply
>     for funds?
>     and
>   * If so, what constraints should be place on this (use of funds,
>     quantum etc)?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>
> *From:*Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 7:18 AM
> *To:* Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez at icann.org>
> *Cc:* ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from 
> today's CCWG-AP meeting
>
> Hello,
>
> Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for 
> minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for 
> more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working 
> towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN 
> budget. ;-)
>
> However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred 
> to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set 
> by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group 
> should try to achieve.
>
> I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some 
> community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be 
> eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to 
> more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve.
>
> Regards
>
> Sent from my mobile
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>
> On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez at icann.org 
> <mailto:xavier.calvez at icann.org>> wrote:
>
>     All,
>
>     I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current
>     policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum
>     12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment
>     Policy, see at
>     https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en[icann.org]
>     <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources_pages_investment-2Dpolicy-2D2014-2D07-2D30-2Den&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=Dww8xHmK4zEHqHK0lHK7IdorPuvHkXKk1luyeB5pBxQ&s=rcBRrG4RZelJUExS-glQJgvDHB75hZlkZOX7O2qDG_A&e=>,
>     see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below).
>
>     “The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the
>     Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the
>     Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency
>     requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a
>     level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected
>     expenditures.“
>
>     I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used
>     in non-profit organizations.
>
>     Thank you.
>
>     Best,
>
>     Xavier
>
>     Xavier Calvez
>
>     ICANN – SVP & CFO
>
>     12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>
>     Los Angeles, CA 90094
>
>     Phone: 310-301-5838
>
>     Mobile: 805-312-0052
>
>     Fax: 310-957-2348
>
>     *From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org
>     <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Alan
>     Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>>
>     *Date: *Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM
>     *To: *Dietmar Stefitz <djs at bemarnet.es <mailto:djs at bemarnet.es>>,
>     Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas at gmail.com
>     <mailto:mkaranicolas at gmail.com>>, Kavouss Arasteh
>     <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>
>     *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>     <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>"
>     <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>     <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>>
>     *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from
>     today's CCWG-AP meeting
>
>     To be clear, I don't think anyone on the call suggested we build
>     up the reserve to a 12 or 24 month level of current budget. Xavier
>     said that 1 year was a typical norm for non-profits, but in my
>     opinion, there is no need for that, as in the case of emergency,
>     costs could be ramped down quickly.
>
>     I vaguely recall that the level that we were targeting (before the
>     drain from the CCWG-Acct expenses) was something like $80m. So
>     even if we contributed enough to get back to that level, it would
>     be perhaps $40m.
>
>     But the issue in my mind is not how much, but if.
>
>     Alan
>
>     At 10/08/2017 03:28 PM, Dietmar Stefitz wrote:
>
>
>
>
>         Hi Erika and all,
>
>         I have been very astonished to hear the proposal to use the
>         Auction Money in filling up the reserve account of ICANN.
>         Filling up for 12 month reserve or 24 month reserve, if we
>         have to take 24 month, there will not be much left to disburse
>         to other projects.
>
>         I thought that the call from Xavier has been to explain
>         specially the Investment of the fund at this moment, for which
>         I can only congratulate.
>         A 1% return on a super save investment is not bad, and it
>         should be made like this in the future.
>
>         I would absolutely be against a filling up of the reserve fund
>         from the auction proceeds, at least as a decision from this group.
>         Or did I misunderstand something?
>
>         Dietmar Stefitz
>
>
>
>
>
>
>         Thursday, August 10, 2017, 8:05:56 PM, you wrote:
>
>         *MK> Hi Kavouss,
>
>         MK> Am I missing something - or are you suggesting that the
>         CCWG should
>         MK> only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's
>         reserve
>         MK> account, without also indicating what proportion should be
>         used to
>         MK> that effect?
>
>         MK> If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything
>         beyond that
>         MK> simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how
>         much money we
>         MK> would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is
>         replenished.
>         MK> Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made
>         unless we
>         MK> also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right?
>
>         MK> Michael Karanicolas
>
>         MK> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss Arasteh
>         MK> <*kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
>         <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>*> wrote:
>
>
>         >> Dear Erika, Dear All,
>
>         >> Today during the last 15 mints of the call I tried to draw
>         your attention to
>         >> allow me to intervene on the views expressed by Alan
>         reading the Reserve
>         >> account.
>
>         >> If I have well understood his statement he wanted that CCWG
>         discuss the
>         >> level of ICANN reserve account which was announced by
>         Xavier to be
>         >> equivalent to one year budget as objective. As Xavier
>         mentioned this level
>         >> has not been reached.
>
>         >> Alan’s view that CCWG discuss the level of ICANN reserve
>         account is outside**
>         >> the mandate of CCWG. We may just decide whether or not that
>         account be fed**
>         >> by using Auction money but decision on the appropriate
>         level of the reserve
>         >> account is totally outside or mandate as it is a decision
>         to be made by the
>         >> Board and not by this group
>
>         >> Regards
>
>         >> Kavouss
>
>
>         >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Joke Braeken
>         <*joke.braeken at icann.org <mailto:joke.braeken at icann.org> *>
>         >> wrote:
>
>         >>> Dear All,
>
>
>
>         >>> Please find below the notes and action items from
>         today’s CCWG-AP meeting.**
>
>
>
>         >>> Best regards,**
>
>
>
>         >>> Joke Braeken**
>
>
>
>         >>> Notes CCWG – AP Meeting 10 August 2017:**
>
>
>
>         >>> These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG
>         navigate through the**
>         >>> content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for
>         the transcript
>         >>> and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are
>         provided separately and
>         >>> are posted on the wiki at:
>         *https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw[community.icann.org]
>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=6OyX-H7GEmBCRJWXNDGE46VvO6oDVoRB82Z2AeomXAg&e=>*.
>
>
>
>         >>> Roll Call
>
>
>
>         >>> Please state your name for transcription purposes and keep
>         microphones on
>         >>> mute when not speaking.
>         >>> Attendance will be taken from the AdobeConnect room.
>
>
>
>         >>> Welcome – DOI**
>
>
>
>         >>> Overview from Xavier Calvez on investment management
>
>
>
>         >>> The intention of this presentation is
>
>         >>> to allow the group to think on the issue of investment,
>         >>> to understand ICANN's practice, and to answer any
>         questions that might be
>         >>> raised.
>
>         >>> It helps to inform the discussion on the ROI of the fund;
>         It includes an
>         >>> overview of how the auction proceeds are currently
>         managed, which might lead
>         >>> to how they might be managed in the future.
>
>
>
>         >>> Important to note:
>
>         >>> only conservative investment policies are being used
>         >>> the investment strategy will be designed in support of the
>         objectives
>
>
>
>         >>> An overview of some illustrative investment scenarios was
>         provided,
>         >>> followed by Q&A.
>
>
>
>         >>> Parameters that need to be considered:
>
>         >>> amount of money
>         >>> horizon
>         >>> level of risk (which is not correlated to the horizon)
>
>
>
>         >>> Financial information is regularly provided during the
>         quarterly
>         >>> stakeholder calls.
>
>         >>> (amount from latest update - Q3 data of FY17.
>         *>>> https://www.icann.org/quarterlyreports[icann.org]
>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterlyreports&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=baFsmaqAdvnSkJG4eoXhzZNn5-StHSA9z08s4kUvK4E&e=>*)
>
>         >>> Reserve Fund: 64 million
>         >>> New gTLD unspent application fees: 128 million
>         >>> Auction proceeds: 233 million
>         >>> Annual budget of ICANN. FY18 budget expenses 142 million USD.
>
>
>
>         >>> Regarding replenishing the reserve fund: appropriate
>         procedures need to be
>         >>> taken, appropriate approvals and decisions need to be in
>         place for it to be
>         >>> legal.
>
>         >>> This is however a moral question as well. The charter does
>         include this
>         >>> question: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN,
>         the Organization or**
>         >>> a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of
>         the auction funds†**
>
>         >>> The group needs to discuss this at a later stage.**
>
>
>
>         >>> Next meeting**
>
>
>
>         >>> next CCWG-AP meeting is scheduled for Thursday 24 August
>         at 14.00 UTC**
>
>
>
>         >>> = = = =
>
>
>
>         >>> Action item #1:
>
>         >>> CCWG to review the slides presented by Xavier (published on
>         *>>>
>         https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/2017-08-10+CCWG+New+gTLD+Auction+Proceeds+call[community.icann.org]
>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_CWGONGAP_2017-2D08-2D10-2BCCWG-2BNew-2BgTLD-2BAuction-2BProceeds-2Bcall&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=FQiYsQAxL7CV_3RJCSjIYJtSMgDGoFBN-QeXmJoUPBU&e=>
>         *)
>         >>> and to share any further questions for Xavier on the
>         group’s mailing list.**
>
>
>
>         >>> Action item #2:**
>
>         >>> Per the discussion during the CCWG-AP meeting on 27 July
>         2017, the**
>         >>> attached mind map was developed, which aims to regroup the
>         objectives based
>         >>> on the survey results as well as the subsequent
>         discussions.  The CCWG is
>         >>> encouraged to continue to provide feedback on the proposed
>         regrouping of
>         >>> objectives/priorities, as well as the clustering of
>         examples ahead of the
>         >>> next meeting, scheduled for 24 August at 14 UTC.
>
>
>
>         >>> Action item #3:
>
>         >>> CCWG to review responses to charter question #4 and to
>         continue the
>         >>> discussion on the mailing list.
>
>         >>> (see
>         *https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-6GNDQHJ6/[surveymonkey.com]
>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_results_SM-2D6GNDQHJ6_&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=yulKeXnAn5CN2_dNRAj8nx_5IeuwBT4F1Heh3dtZJWI&e=>*)
>
>
>
>         >>> = = = =
>
>
>
>
>
>         >>> Joke Braeken
>
>         >>> ccNSO Policy Advisor
>
>         *>>> joke.braeken at icann.org <mailto:joke.braeken at icann.org>
>
>
>
>         *>>> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter:
>         *https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com]
>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ccNSO&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=ksIYlCk3ZzcyyNbJFUxushrbiDZC4_lO_WVwmhRrWG4&e=>
>
>         *>>> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook:
>         *https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/[facebook.com]
>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_ccnso_&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=K_zzz3ZhAdQ0ckOqfmq_HvpwupZ-DfQbOd39kyGgqsI&e=>
>
>         >>> http://ccnso.icann.org[ccnso.icann.org]
>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ccnso.icann.org_&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=kopXyX7wBTECByzaEGsPL-Mbcct5zfvtn4kCkugUF3I&e=>
>
>
>
>
>         *>>> _______________________________________________
>         >>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>         *>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>         <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
>         >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>
>
>
>         *>> _______________________________________________
>         >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>         *>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>         <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
>         >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>         *MK> _______________________________________________
>         MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>         *MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>         <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
>         MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>
>
>
>         /--
>         Saludos,
>         Dietmar
>
>         Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>         Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>         Content-Disposition: inline
>         X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
>         1;MWHPR03MB2718;27:YWDqnEPXx/CS7utzz6td9Qa3koj9je2Sjv9LFnursD0J2VA30AdYQS9BENOC1oqUgmoT+mzlFx7ydYsubIRVesT4Y1jhb3iYxs4FdjVwmhiKOJ9o59lZBh7cDwAsDaB/
>         X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery:
>         ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000128)(400125000095)(20160514016)(750103)(520002050)(400001001223)(400125100095)(61617095)(400001002128)(400125200095);
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>         Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>         <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds/
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>     Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds

-- 


      Carolina Caeiro

*Coordinadora de Proyectos de Desarrollo*
Coordinator of Development Projects

/www.lacnic.net <http://www.lacnic.net>
Latin American and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20170823/d4e2c842/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: correolacnic15.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9957 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20170823/d4e2c842/correolacnic15-0001.png>


More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list