<p dir="ltr">Wow.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Very enlightening indeed Paul. Thank you.</p>
<p dir="ltr">------<br>
Rgds,</p>
<p dir="ltr">Tracy</p>
<p dir="ltr"> </p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Oct 24, 2014 4:33 AM, "Paul M Kane" <<a href="mailto:Paul.Kane@icb.co.uk">Paul.Kane@icb.co.uk</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">The ccNSO is a valuable forum for those ccTLDs that wish to discuss issues and (potentially) be accountable to ICANN and its processes/determinations.<br>
<br>
There are many ccTLDs that have never been to a ccNSO meeting, know little about ICANN and are accountable to their users under the laws of the jurisdiction in which the ccTLD Registry is incorporated and/or the legal jurisdiction of the user contracts with the ccTLD Registry.<br>
<br>
Unlike gTLDs which specifically obtain their authority to be in the IANA ROOT by virtue of a contract with ICANN, the ccTLD Registry falls into (at least) two categories. There are ccTLDs that have agreements with ICANN and those that do not.<br>
<br>
To be specific, 7 have a MoU with ICANN, 9 have a "Sponsorship Agreement" with ICANN, 27 have an "Accountability Agreement" with ICANN, 42 have an "Exchange of Letters" with ICANN and 170 ccTLDs do not cede authority to ICANN.<br>
<br>
Best<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Thank you Peter ... extremely helpful. I assume you also have counted those in LACTLD?<br>
<br>
So ... 96 ccTLDs could POTENTIALLY not recognize the ccNSO in any future organizational arrangement involving the ccNSO as is being suggested here.<br>
<br>
That is not insubstantial.<br>
<br>
I can also imagine that when you factor those that are Government affiliated within these 96 ccTLDs, the issues become quite complex as they relate to these discussions.<br>
<br>
I wonder if this is the nexus for GAC involvement in future organizational arrangements ...<br>
<br>
However that will still POTENTIALLY leave some ccTLDs out of the future arrangements being considered here, save for coercing them into joining either the ccNSO or the regional orgs.<br>
<br>
Any thoughts?<br>
<br>
/t<br>
<br>
On Oct 24, 2014 3:20 AM, "Peter Van Roste" <<a href="mailto:peter@centr.org" target="_blank">peter@centr.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:peter@centr.org" target="_blank">peter@centr.org</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Thanks Tracy for raising this.<br>
<br>
Becky is right, this process is open to all ccTLDs. The regional<br>
organisations are reaching out to those that are not in the ccNSO<br>
and to those that are unaffiliated in their respective regions.<br>
<br>
However, it should be taken into account when discussing the<br>
future role the ccNSO could play, that some ccTLDs will not<br>
recognize the ccNSO as a representative of their interests.<br>
<br>
Some stats:<br>
<br>
Out of the 248 ccTLDs:<br>
<br>
152 are members of the ccNSO. Most of those are also a member of<br>
their regional organisation (AfTLD, APTLD, CENTR and APTLD).<br>
<br>
38 ccTLDs are members of their regional organisation but not of<br>
the ccNSO.<br>
<br>
58 ccTLDs are unaffiliated.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Peter Van Roste<br>
<br>
General Manager, CENTR<br>
<br>
*From:* <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.<u></u>org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-<u></u>bounces@icann.org</a>><br>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-<u></u>bounces@icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-<u></u>bounces@icann.org</a>>] *On Behalf Of *Burr, Becky<br>
*Sent:* donderdag 23 oktober 2014 23:37<br>
*To:* Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google; Allan MacGillivray<br>
*Cc:* <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>><br>
*Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names<br>
Community vs the other two communities<br>
<br>
Some of those who do not participate in the ccNSO do participate<br>
in regional organizations such as LACTLD and APTLD. We have also<br>
set up a global list to communicate with ccTLDs that don’t<br>
participate in either. Note that the ccNSO rules permit cc’s to<br>
participate fully without actually joining the ccNSO itself.<br>
<br>
J. Beckwith Burr<br>
<br>
*Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer<br>
<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006<br>
<br>
Office: <a href="tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+ 1.202.533.2932</a> <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932> Mobile:<br>
<a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a> <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> / <a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>> / <a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">www.neustar.biz</a><br>
<<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">http://www.neustar.biz</a>><br>
<br>
*From: *"Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google" <<a href="mailto:tracyhackshaw@gmail.com" target="_blank">tracyhackshaw@gmail.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:tracyhackshaw@gmail.com" target="_blank">tracyhackshaw@gmail.<u></u>com</a>>><br>
*Date: *Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 5:31 PM<br>
*To: *Allan MacGillivray <<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca" target="_blank">allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca" target="_blank">allan.macgillivray@<u></u>cira.ca</a>>><br>
*Cc: *Becky Burr <<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>>>, Milton L Mueller<br>
<<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">mueller@syr.edu</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">mueller@syr.edu</a>>>, Guru Acharya<br>
<<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>>>,<br>
"<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>>><br>
*Subject: *Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names<br>
Community vs the other two communities<br>
<br>
What about the ccTLDs who are NOT part of the ccNSO ... has this<br>
been discussed/dealt with already?<br>
<br>
<br>
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Allan MacGillivray<br>
<<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca" target="_blank">allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca" target="_blank">allan.macgillivray@<u></u>cira.ca</a>>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
So let’s see if I have got this correct. The idea is that the<br>
registries would set up a corporation that could contract with<br>
IANA, either as a stand-alone entity or as a department of ICANN,<br>
for the performance of the IANA functions – let’s call it<br>
‘RegistryCo’ for short. Would there not be liability concerns on<br>
the part of many registries to being directors of RegistryCo? Even if they could be convinced, would those ccTLDs that are<br>
governments be comfortable with such an approach? And it would<br>
need some money to get going. Incorporating does take little<br>
money, but negotiating the contract would be quite another issue.<br>
<br>
*From:* Burr, Becky [mailto:<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>>]<br>
*Sent:* October-23-14 4:20 PM<br>
*To:* Milton L Mueller; Guru Acharya<br>
*Cc:* Allan MacGillivray; Fouad Bajwa; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
*Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names<br>
Community vs the other two communities<br>
<br>
Correct. In any case, it takes very little time or money to<br>
create a light weight legal entity.<br>
<br>
J Beckwith Burr<br>
<br>
*Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer<br>
<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006<br>
<br>
Office: <a href="tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+ 1.202.533.2932</a> <tel:%2B%201.202.5332932> Mobile:<br>
<a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a> <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> / becky.burr@neustarbiz<br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>> / <a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">www.neustar.biz</a><br>
<<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">http://www.neustar.biz</a>><br>
<br>
*From: *Milton L Mueller <<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">mueller@syr.edu</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mailto-3Amueller-40syr.edu&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=GgzA5SwJogI0ald8wwDSR-ml1BmbWp0LkVsHeAGs0EU&s=ZpmqRGN-6diwUv7gbTulgFXccZAa2eMl5e0pxgIPoEk&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__mailto-3Amueller-40syr.<u></u>edu&d=AAMFaQ&c=<u></u>MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=<u></u>62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=GgzA5SwJogI0ald8wwDSR-<u></u>ml1BmbWp0LkVsHeAGs0EU&s=<u></u>ZpmqRGN-<u></u>6diwUv7gbTulgFXccZAa2eMl5e0pxg<u></u>IPoEk&e=</a>>><br>
*Date: *Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 3:41 PM<br>
*To: *Guru Acharya <<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>>>, Becky Burr <<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>>><br>
*Cc: *Allan MacGillivray <<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca" target="_blank">allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca" target="_blank">allan.macgillivray@<u></u>cira.ca</a>>>, Fouad Bajwa<br>
<<a href="mailto:fouadbajwa@gmail.com" target="_blank">fouadbajwa@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:fouadbajwa@gmail.com" target="_blank">fouadbajwa@gmail.com</a>>><u></u>,<br>
"<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>>><br>
*Subject: *RE: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names<br>
Community vs the other two communities<br>
<br>
No. Guru this is incorrect. Both the CCNSO and the GNSO are made<br>
up of mostly incorporated legal entities. Certainly the TLD<br>
registries in both entities are legally incorporated.<br>
<br>
*From:* Guru Acharya [mailto:<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>]<br>
<br>
Even though NFL is an unincorporated association, the 32<br>
independent teams that comprise the unincorporated association are<br>
legal entities. These 32 legal entities then collectively enter to<br>
into pooled-rights contract with any third party.<br>
<br>
In comparison, CCNSO and GNSO are not legal entities; and they can<br>
not form an unincorporated association.<br>
<br>
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:39 PM, Burr, Becky<br>
<<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
The law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but in the<br>
US, the question is whether there is an enforceable contract<br>
and not whether one of the contracting parties is a formal<br>
legal entity. I can assure you, the NFL enforces contracts<br>
all the time.<br>
<br>
J. Beckwith Burr<br>
<br>
*Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer<br>
<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006<br>
<br>
Office: <a href="tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+ 1.202.533.2932</a> <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932> Mobile:<br>
<a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a> <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> /<br>
<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>> /<br>
<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">www.neustar.biz</a> <<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">http://www.neustar.biz</a>><br>
<br>
*From: *Allan MacGillivray <<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca" target="_blank">allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca" target="_blank">allan.macgillivray@<u></u>cira.ca</a>>><br>
*Date: *Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 12:04 PM<br>
*To: *Becky Burr <<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>>>, Milton L Mueller<br>
<<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">mueller@syr.edu</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mailto-3Amueller-40syr.edu&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=INYMVpabyaFlLICPn_6grbXytRGxGNbwdxstS1N6kfU&s=xm679ts9ebwDNuRzz6N0a2u03BsoJV4iMSTlfNWBXKU&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__mailto-3Amueller-40syr.<u></u>edu&d=AAMGaQ&c=<u></u>MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=<u></u>62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=INYMVpabyaFlLICPn_<u></u>6grbXytRGxGNbwdxstS1N6kfU&s=<u></u>xm679ts9ebwDNuRzz6N0a2u03BsoJV<u></u>4iMSTlfNWBXKU&e=</a>>>,<br>
Fouad Bajwa <<a href="mailto:fouadbajwa@gmail.com" target="_blank">fouadbajwa@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:fouadbajwa@gmail.com" target="_blank">fouadbajwa@gmail.com</a>>><br>
*Cc: *"<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>>" <<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>>><br>
*Subject: *RE: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names<br>
Community vs the other two communities<br>
<br>
Becky – you raise a very important point as to whether<br>
unincorporated entities can enter into enforceable contracts. If they can, it may simplify things considerably e.g. have<br>
ccNSO, GNSO, ALAC? 'take over’ the contact with ICANN. I had<br>
been labouring under the assumption that the ccNSO, GNSO would<br>
have to incorporate to do this. How can we get clarity on this?<br>
<br>
Allan<br>
<br>
*From:*<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-<u></u>bounces@icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-<u></u>bounces@icann.org</a>><br>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship-<u></u>bounces@icann.org</a>] *On Behalf Of<br>
*Burr, Becky<br>
*Sent:* October-23-14 11:43 AM<br>
*To:* Milton L Mueller; Fouad Bajwa<br>
*Cc:* <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>><br>
*Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names<br>
Community vs the other two communities<br>
<br>
Rather than starting with legal constructs, let’s begin by<br>
talking about what we need to accomplish requisite<br>
accountability. To me, we need some independent committee,<br>
council, unincorporated association, or representative group<br>
to have a contract with ICANN/IANA for performing IANA<br>
functions consistent with SLA’s to be negotiated and<br>
documented. We need this entity, presumably representative of<br>
IANA service consumers, to have recourse if the SLA’s are not<br>
met.<br>
<br>
If this is correct, then we can look at what kind of legal<br>
entity we need for the “SLA Council.” Seems to me that the<br>
core of this group would be registry operators, perhaps with<br>
representation from other stakeholders like registstrars,<br>
registrants, etc. Could be stand alone or perhaps housed in<br>
ISOC or the IETF? I am pretty sure that unincorporated<br>
associations can enter into enforceable contracts, etc. (For<br>
example, the National Football League in the US is actually an<br>
unincorporated association).<br>
<br>
Second, we need a mechanism that ensure recourse and redress<br>
for a registry that is wrongfully revoked, delegated, etc. That mechanism can be provided to all through the ICANN<br>
bylaws, e.g., as an independent review.<br>
<br>
J. Beckwith Burr<br>
<br>
*Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer<br>
<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006<br>
<br>
Office: <a href="tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+ 1.202.533.2932</a> <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932> Mobile:<br>
<a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a> <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> /<br>
<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><u></u>> /<br>
<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">www.neustar.biz</a> <<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank">http://www.neustar.biz</a>><br>
<br>
*From: *Milton L Mueller <<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">mueller@syr.edu</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mailto-3Amueller-40syr.edu&d=AAMFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=9jEM_hACGXiATouHvV-V_jUNH5sc3y-bQFzqRD4_qRU&s=WD5mnQGH8gOzXMllT3aJRt_wLg7aZMZR0oiM_ERgS0g&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__mailto-3Amueller-40syr.<u></u>edu&d=AAMFAw&c=<u></u>MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=<u></u>62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=9jEM_hACGXiATouHvV-V_<u></u>jUNH5sc3y-bQFzqRD4_qRU&s=<u></u>WD5mnQGH8gOzXMllT3aJRt_<u></u>wLg7aZMZR0oiM_ERgS0g&e=</a>>><br>
*Date: *Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 11:17 AM<br>
*To: *Fouad Bajwa <<a href="mailto:fouadbajwa@gmail.com" target="_blank">fouadbajwa@gmail.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:fouadbajwa@gmail.com" target="_blank">fouadbajwa@gmail.com</a>>><br>
*Cc: *"<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>>" <<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>>><br>
*Subject: *Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [IANA-issues] Fwd: Names<br>
Community vs the other two communities<br>
<br>
Fouad:<br>
<br>
By the “technical community proposals” I assume you mean the<br>
protocols community.<br>
<br>
What your argument misses is that IANA _/is/_ a separate<br>
organizational entity for both the numbers and protocols<br>
communities.<br>
<br>
The protocol community has an MoU with ICANN that authorizes<br>
ICANN to perform the IANA functions for them. That MoU can be<br>
revoked, and IETF can decide to use someone else. That is the<br>
perfect accountability mechanism. Now, tell me how the names<br>
community achieves that same wonderful state? There are two<br>
ways to do it: pull the IANA out of ICANN, or set up a new<br>
contracting authority to replace the NTIA, which could<br>
periodically award the contract to ICANN or to anyone else<br>
qualified.<br>
<br>
No one wants “the IANA technical and policy functions [might]<br>
fall into the hands and whims of governments.” That in fact is<br>
a requirement imposed on the transition by the NTIA. But we do<br>
need to make significant organizational changes if we are to<br>
meet the requirement of accountability. I think scare talk<br>
about take overs can divert our attention from needed reforms<br>
and I would resist that kind of talk.<br>
<br>
I don't think that IANA should be evolved as a separate entity<br>
at all and create new opportunities for bureaucracies for<br>
governments and industry control.<br>
<br>
The technical community proposals are highly reasonable to not<br>
make such a big fuss out of it and help IANA transition under<br>
a body that is somewhat messed up but can be improved in the<br>
long run however, ICANN would need some changes.<br>
<br>
The technical community has also shown its concern that it<br>
doesn't want the IANA technical and policy function to fall<br>
into the hands of the whims of governments because it<br>
functions to the technical community's needs adequately in its<br>
present environment and role.<br>
<br>
Your challenge and for the ICG is to propose that most<br>
transparent and accountable way forward that ensures an open<br>
and inclusive relationship with the Internet community<br>
treating stakeholders in their respective roles but not giving<br>
preference to one group over another another. I don't have to<br>
go through the Internet Governance ideals over and over again<br>
here.<br>
<br>
First ICANN Board control as the final word for IANA affairs<br>
would have to be reviewed and should be taken into a broader<br>
community review process. I do not trust the ICANN Board to be<br>
able to manage both ICANN and IANA in a transparent and<br>
accountable way, their progress over the years has had its own<br>
set of troubles already.<br>
<br>
The proposals are interesting but not the final word. The<br>
final word will remain with NTIA and thats my concern from a<br>
developing country member citizen perspective. I am going<br>
through a great deal of suggestions and proposals and all show<br>
a similar aspect, don't disturb the IANA technical function<br>
and the policies for IANA developed by the community have work<br>
so far but require more transparency, accountability and<br>
functional relationships with the community ensuring open and<br>
inclusive participation in its policy development processes.<br>
<br>
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Seun Ojedeji<br>
<<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a><u></u>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
+1 Option 2 is preferred from my end also. However i also<br>
added Option 4 as a second preference just incase things<br>
get delayed with the accountability process.<br>
<br>
Cheers!<br>
<br>
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond<br>
<<a href="mailto:ocl@gih.com" target="_blank">ocl@gih.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:ocl@gih.com" target="_blank">ocl@gih.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Hello all,<br>
<br>
you might wish to see an expanded set of "Options", in<br>
a Google Doc which has been shared.<br>
<br>
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B46mlsyZUFF4bZfeWgGCdqIQHCP2BMOy4KZU4RiRiE8/edit?usp=sharing" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/<u></u>document/d/<u></u>1B46mlsyZUFF4bZfeWgGCdqIQHCP2B<u></u>MOy4KZU4RiRiE8/edit?usp=<u></u>sharing</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1B46mlsyZUFF4bZfeWgGCdqIQHCP2BMOy4KZU4RiRiE8_edit-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=fUDcpKHcSBfPHc8c3PFUK3EGMl9QAYJOV5JFJEPECSo&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-<u></u>3A__docs.google.com_document_<u></u>d_<u></u>1B46mlsyZUFF4bZfeWgGCdqIQHCP2B<u></u>MOy4KZU4RiRiE8_edit-3Fusp-<u></u>3Dsharing&d=AAMGaQ&c=<u></u>MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=<u></u>62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=<u></u>fUDcpKHcSBfPHc8c3PFUK3EGMl9QAY<u></u>JOV5JFJEPECSo&e=</a>><br>
<br>
So far, I note that the majority of our participants<br>
on the At-Large IANA Issues WG appears to prefer Option 2.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Olivier<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 15/10/2014 22:55, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:<br>
<br>
FYI<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-------- Forwarded Message --------<br>
<br>
*Subject: *<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
[CWG-Stewardship] Names Community vs the other two<br>
communities<br>
<br>
*Date: *<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Thu, 16 Oct 2014 02:40:47 +0530<br>
<br>
*From: *<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Guru Acharya <<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:gurcharya@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurcharya@gmail.com</a>><br>
<br>
*To: *<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">cwg-stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>><br>
<br>
How the names community approach will differ from<br>
the approach adopted by the numbers community and<br>
protocols community?<br>
<br>
Numbers Community: APNIC has reached consensus on<br>
its proposal. According to the proposal, IANA will<br>
continue to reside in ICANN. It proposes to<br>
replace NTIA oversight with a Service Level<br>
Agreement (SLA) and Affirmation of Commitment<br>
(AOC) between NRO and ICANN.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/apnic/report-ianatransition/1" target="_blank">www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/<u></u>apnic/report-ianatransition/1</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.slideshare.net_fullscreen_apnic_report-2Dianatransition_1&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=ipQr6NSV4s2YyeTKtleRzaehK6NnJP70z0QOuy57W7o&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__www.slideshare.net_<u></u>fullscreen_apnic_report-<u></u>2Dianatransition_1&d=AAMGaQ&c=<u></u>MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=<u></u>62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=<u></u>ipQr6NSV4s2YyeTKtleRzaehK6NnJP<u></u>70z0QOuy57W7o&e=</a>><br>
<br>
Protocols Community: The IETF draft proposal<br>
suggests that no structural changes are required<br>
as a result of the transition. The MOU between<br>
ICANN and the IETF community will continue to<br>
govern the existing relationship. Again, IANA will<br>
continue to reside in ICANN.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-00" target="_blank">http://tools.ietf.org/html/<u></u>draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-<u></u>response-00</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dianaplan-2Dicg-2Dresponse-2D00&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=hsoL84pOSYzJR4QRMfhJYR6ybddmed3Zi1M-kuVH5uQ&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-<u></u>2Dietf-2Dianaplan-2Dicg-<u></u>2Dresponse-2D00&d=AAMGaQ&c=<u></u>MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=<u></u>62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=<u></u>hsoL84pOSYzJR4QRMfhJYR6ybddmed<u></u>3Zi1M-kuVH5uQ&e=</a>><br>
<br>
Therefore, neither the numbers community, nor the<br>
protocol community appear to be in the direction<br>
of suggesting a new MS Oversight Entity to replace<br>
NTIA and its oversight. Merely contracts between<br>
existing entities will be updated to replace NTIA<br>
oversight.<br>
<br>
Can the names community adopt a similar approach?<br>
Can a contractual agreement (SLA/AOC/MOU) between<br>
ICANN and GNSO/CCNSO be expected to replace NTIA<br>
oversight?<br>
<br>
Clearly NO! This approach can not be adopted by<br>
the names community because the names community<br>
resides within ICANN, which is also the IANA<br>
operator. Specifically, GNSO and CCNSO are<br>
essentially subsets of ICANN, and therefore a<br>
contractual agreement (SLA/AOC/MOU) between ICANN<br>
and GNSO/CCNSO can not be expected to replace NTIA<br>
oversight.<br>
<br>
Therefore, it is essential to either<br>
<br>
Option (i): create a new legal entity, which has a<br>
contractual oversight relationship with ICANN.<br>
This would be similar toÂ<br>
<a href="http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/08/04/students-school-faculty-on-iana-transition-the-meissen-proposal/" target="_blank">http://www.internetgovernance.<u></u>org/2014/08/04/students-<u></u>school-faculty-on-iana-<u></u>transition-the-meissen-<u></u>proposal/</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.internetgovernance.org_2014_08_04_students-2Dschool-2Dfaculty-2Don-2Diana-2Dtransition-2Dthe-2Dmeissen-2Dproposal_&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=HC19PauLIvR68L1aaQZMUV1ysZRdzy1Rku_FhtwR4P0&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__www.internetgovernance.<u></u>org_2014_08_04_students-<u></u>2Dschool-2Dfaculty-2Don-<u></u>2Diana-2Dtransition-2Dthe-<u></u>2Dmeissen-2Dproposal_&d=<u></u>AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<u></u>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=<u></u>HC19PauLIvR68L1aaQZMUV1ysZRdzy<u></u>1Rku_FhtwR4P0&e=</a>><br>
<br>
Option (ii): expect ICANN to self-regulate<br>
<br>
Option (iii): make a new legal entity comprising<br>
of CCNSO and GNSO that is structurally independent<br>
of ICANN and require that new entity to enter into<br>
a contractual oversight agreement (SLA/AOC/MOU)<br>
with ICANN.<br>
<br>
From the above three options, clearly option (ii)<br>
is not acceptable because of the lack of trust in<br>
the ICANN enhanced accountability process.<br>
<br>
I also feel that option (iii) is not feasible<br>
because the CCNSO and GNSO are heavily integrated<br>
with ICANN and structural separation of these two<br>
communities from ICANN will be in-feasible.<br>
<br>
Also, from the Jordan Carter document, the option<br>
on page 7 can be discarded, which makes ICANN the<br>
oversight body, as IANA will continue to reside in<br>
ICANN, as clearly suggested by the proposals of<br>
the protocols and numbers community.<br>
<br>
Therefore, option (i) is clearly the only option<br>
available with the names community.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Acharya<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
<br>
Iana-issues mailing list<br>
<br>
<a href="mailto:Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.<u></u>icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">Iana-issues@atlarge-<u></u>lists.icann.org</a>><br>
<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iana-issues" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<u></u>listinfo/iana-issues</a> <<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_iana-2Dissues&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=z-dUNEELhtQ-yVDbG2261BTmwYXpCqVfPM_t-PljY5Q&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-<u></u>3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_<u></u>listinfo_iana-2Dissues&d=<u></u>AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<u></u>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=z-dUNEELhtQ-<u></u>yVDbG2261BTmwYXpCqVfPM_t-<u></u>PljY5Q&e=</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.gih.com/ocl.html" target="_blank">http://www.gih.com/ocl.html</a> <<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.gih.com_ocl.html&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=u0-58tAisZxOIbFv-8rGIWKmmQ0MbrreYyVITk4iFgM&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__www.gih.com_ocl.html&d=<u></u>AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<u></u>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=u0-58tAisZxOIbFv-<u></u>8rGIWKmmQ0MbrreYyVITk4iFgM&e=</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
Iana-issues mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.<u></u>icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">Iana-issues@atlarge-<u></u>lists.icann.org</a>><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iana-issues" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<u></u>listinfo/iana-issues</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mmicann.org_mailman_listinfo_iana-2Dissues&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=z-dUNEELhtQ-yVDbG2261BTmwYXpCqVfPM_t-PljY5Q&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-<u></u>3A__mmicann.org_mailman_<u></u>listinfo_iana-2Dissues&d=<u></u>AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<u></u>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=z-dUNEELhtQ-<u></u>yVDbG2261BTmwYXpCqVfPM_t-<u></u>PljY5Q&e=</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
------------------------------<u></u>------------------------------<u></u>------------<br>
<br>
/Seun Ojedeji,<br>
Federal University Oye-Ekiti<br>
web: //<a href="http://www.fuoye.edu.ng/" target="_blank">http://www.fuoye.edu.ng/</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fuoye.edu.ng&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=ZYONh-kEmB5dv3rzYIFWLLSMsZ6JohvhU3mRuNA0IvA&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__www.fuoye.edu.ng&d=AAMGaQ&<u></u>c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=<u></u>62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=ZYONh-<u></u>kEmB5dv3rzYIFWLLSMsZ6JohvhU3mR<u></u>uNA0IvA&e=</a>>/<br>
//Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B2348035233535" value="+2348035233535" target="_blank">+2348035233535</a> <tel:%2B2348035233535>//<br>
//alt email://<a href="http://seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng/" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@fuoye.<u></u>edu.ng/</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@fuoye.<u></u>edu.ng</a>><br>
<br>
The key to understanding is humility - my view !<br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
Iana-issues mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.<u></u>icann.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.icann.org" target="_blank">Iana-issues@atlarge-<u></u>lists.icann.org</a>><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iana-issues" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<u></u>listinfo/iana-issues</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_iana-2Dissues&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=z-dUNEELhtQ-yVDbG2261BTmwYXpCqVfPM_t-PljY5Q&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-<u></u>3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_<u></u>listinfo_iana-2Dissues&d=<u></u>AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<u></u>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=z-dUNEELhtQ-<u></u>yVDbG2261BTmwYXpCqVfPM_t-<u></u>PljY5Q&e=</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- Regards.<br>
--------------------------<br>
Fouad Bajwa<br>
ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor<br>
My Blog: Internet's Governance:<br>
<a href="http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://internetsgovernance.<u></u>blogspot.com/</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__internetsgovernance.blogspot.com_&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=zkexu-3haN6fnsOXhCc6YlS9R1_kJqU41Ly9Qg6NDw8&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__internetsgovernance.<u></u>blogspot.com_&d=AAMGaQ&c=<u></u>MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=<u></u>62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=zkexu-<u></u>3haN6fnsOXhCc6YlS9R1_<u></u>kJqU41Ly9Qg6NDw8&e=</a>><br>
Follow my Tweets: <a href="http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_fouadbajwa&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=iSr26xOvv_x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy07cw&s=Q41AU5yY9bUlqSxfJs-fCoCh4KuNHdFYeG8IwC5gisw&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-<u></u>3A__twitter.com_fouadbajwa&d=<u></u>AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<u></u>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=iSr26xOvv_<u></u>x1A2nuUqvtaRwVOgTvzV0efqUDkGy0<u></u>7cw&s=Q41AU5yY9bUlqSxfJs-<u></u>fCoCh4KuNHdFYeG8IwC5gisw&e=</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<u></u>listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_cwg-2Dstewardship&d=AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=INYMVpabyaFlLICPn_6grbXytRGxGNbwdxstS1N6kfU&s=i8zyWIAX2_rh8EVJjDDnKtCQtxhae8Qqzt-EA16lRiY&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-<u></u>3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_<u></u>listinfo_cwg-2Dstewardship&d=<u></u>AAMGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<u></u>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=INYMVpabyaFlLICPn_<u></u>6grbXytRGxGNbwdxstS1N6kfU&s=<u></u>i8zyWIAX2_<u></u>rh8EVJjDDnKtCQtxhae8Qqzt-<u></u>EA16lRiY&e=</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.<u></u>org</a>><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<u></u>listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
<<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_cwg-2Dstewardship&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=GgzA5SwJogI0ald8wwDSR-ml1BmbWp0LkVsHeAGs0EU&s=0knJhHDN8_VTb0SESfSAujo5jrIrLR9bFwC6kRIu9PY&e=" target="_blank">https://urldefense.<u></u>proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-<u></u>3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_<u></u>listinfo_cwg-2Dstewardship&d=<u></u>AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<u></u>lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_<u></u>GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k<u></u>&m=GgzA5SwJogI0ald8wwDSR-<u></u>ml1BmbWp0LkVsHeAGs0EU&s=<u></u>0knJhHDN8_<u></u>VTb0SESfSAujo5jrIrLR9bFwC6kRIu<u></u>9PY&e=</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<u></u>listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote></div>