<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><a name="_MailEndCompose" class="" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 15px;"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class=""> No objections to the schedule, but it seems like we are losing a lot of time. If you need help with the work plan or any of the documents, let me know. It seems like we have fallen off time targets and it would be great to be in a position to start a pdp on this soon. </span></a></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">I think the Los Angeles meeting took some wind out of our sails, as my sense of the room was that we needed to wait for further inputs and work in parallel to some external processes. We now have received the Staff report but we still have other reviews of which we will need to take account in preparing the Draft Charter and in the policy work that will take place later. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I don’t know that starting the policy process earlier necessarily means that subsequent rounds will start earlier, but I appreciate the need to move forward, with due consideration of the big picture and the many reviews now underway, and thank you for kick-starting this. Steve and I spoke in Singapore about having bi-weekly calls from now to completion, so look for an invite and schedule in the next few days. I’d really like to get this to the Names Council for approval before or at the Buenos Aires meeting, so let’s think about a work plan that will allow that to happen. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">To your point at the Council meeting in Singapore, I’d like to get some staff input on the required public comment periods prior to launching a PDP. We had talked about having a public comment period just for our draft report, but if the same report, more or less, is going to pass through a mandatory public comment period at some in the near term, I think we should develop a work plan that uses the mandatory comment period and skips the elective comment period. No point in have two comment period on essentially the same piece of work. Perhaps Marika or Steve could update us on what is required between now and launching the formal PDP.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""> Bret</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class=""><div class="">-- </div><div class=""><b class="">Bret Fausett, Esq.</b></div><div class="">General Counsel, Uniregistry, Corp.</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><span style="font-size: 11px;" class="">12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 200</span></div><div class=""><span style="font-size: 11px;" class="">Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536</span><br class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">mobile +1 310 985 1351</span></div><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><span style="font-size: 11px;" class="">office +1 949 706 2300 x4201</span><div class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">UTC -8 hours • <a href="http://uniregistry.link" class="">http://uniregistry.link</a></span></div><br class=""></div></div></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div><br class=""></div></div></body></html>