<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Thanks all.<div><br></div><div>So right now I have the questions below. Any further comments or edits?</div><div><br></div><div>Stéphane</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>For the ccNSO<br><br>- A short explanation of how the 2 Councils work.<br><br>- What are the ccNSO currently working on, <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Segoe UI'; font-size: 13px; ">and which of these projects do they anticipate direct GNSO input/feedback to be useful (if any)?</span><br><br>- Does the ccNSO see value in meeting with the GNSO Council and if so, how can we maximise that value?<br><br>- There are big changes to the current ICANN landscape coming, with respect to new gTLDs, what would the ccNSO's position be on cc operators that plan to run gTLDs?<br><br>- <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 13px; ">Is it likely the move from cc to more general purpose (eg. .CO, .ME, .TV) will accelerate?</span><br><br>For the GAC<br><br>- Do we want to have a formal group formed between GAC and GNSO to discuss and <br><br>- Should we work on finding a new liaison from the GAC to the GNSO ?<br><br>- H<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Segoe UI'; font-size: 13px; ">ow can the GNSO assist the GAC and the Board to implement the </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Segoe UI'; font-size: 13px; ">ATRT recs #12 & #13</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Segoe UI'; font-size: 13px; "> recs (i.e. engaging the GAC earlier in the policy development process, and ensuring that the GAC is fully informed as to the policy agenda at ICANN)? Would CWGs be useful in this regard? What is the GAC's views on CWGs and how would the GAC propose such groups' recommendations be processed?</span></div><div><br></div></body></html>