<div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Dear All, </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">I am closely and keenly following this mathematical exercise which could
ends to very many of options.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">We need to be efficient and objectives.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">We need to also understand that there are sensitivities on IDN prioritization.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">However, time is of essence .We must conclude this issue very soon.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Why not Jeff kindly take the closest options and try to streamline the
differences and come up with a proposed compromised.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">None of the suggestions are wrong but we need to end up this dispute.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Please establish a deadline of 5 working days. If no agreement is
reached the approach taken in 2012, right or wrong; prevails </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Regards</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Kavouss </span></p></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:10 AM Maxim Alzoba <<a href="mailto:m.alzoba@gmail.com">m.alzoba@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I agree, <br>
<br>
There should be no forced volunteering for the IDNs. <br>
<br>
What damage to the round and applicants and ICANN could be caused by later processing of those IDNs, who decided to do so with all other applicants? <br>
<br>
Maxim Alzoba<br>
<br>
On 22 Apr 2020, 11:58, at 11:58, Alexander Schubert <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:<br>
>Dear Jeff,<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>If there are only 150 IDN applications, and only 75 of them have<br>
>requested<br>
>priority processing: then it is my understanding that only those 75<br>
>will be<br>
>processed in the first batch, and 425 non-IDN applications. It doesn’t<br>
>make<br>
>sense to deny applicants to choose to NOT be prioritized. Any<br>
>application<br>
>that is not explicitly requesting prioritization should be processed<br>
>only<br>
>after those who requested priority have been processed.<br>
><br>
>A question: Why do we grant a request for prioritization? It is because<br>
>the<br>
>applicant voices a desire to start up their registry fast, right? Or<br>
>are<br>
>there any other motivators for ICANN or the Internet Community to<br>
>prioritize<br>
>IDN applications?<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Thanks,<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Alexander<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>] On<br>
>Behalf<br>
>Of Jeff Neuman<br>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 9:41 PM<br>
>To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" target="_blank">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
>Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Final Compromise Proposal for the<br>
>Prioritization of IDN applications<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Anne,<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>You description is almost right with a big exception. <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>1. In the first batch of 500, yes the first 125 applications processed<br>
>will be IDNs. But they are not the first 125 applications that are<br>
>received. It will be 125 IDN applications selected by Random Draw (out<br>
>of<br>
>the pool of all IDN applications). The next 375 applications processed<br>
>are<br>
>not the next 375 apps received, but rather a random selection of 375<br>
>applications out of the pool of ALL remaining applications (both IDN<br>
>and<br>
>Non-IDN).<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>2. The second batch takes 50 IDN applications randomly drawn from all<br>
>remaining IDN applications. The next 450 applications are selected at<br>
>random from the pool of ALL applications (both IDN and non-IDN<br>
>applications).<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>3. In summary, there is no temporal (?) component. In other words, it<br>
>doesn’t matter at what point in time the applications were received.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>With respect to prioritizing community applications, there was little<br>
>support for that in the Working Group nor was there general support for<br>
>that<br>
>in the comments we received other than perhaps from some GAC members. <br>
>That<br>
>is not to discount that input, but rather just to state that for now<br>
>that is<br>
>not an element of the proposal.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Hope that helps.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Jeff Neuman<br>
><br>
>Senior Vice President <br>
><br>
>Com Laude | Valideus<br>
><br>
>D: +1.703.635.7514<br>
><br>
>E: <mailto:<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com" target="_blank">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>> <a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com" target="_blank">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a><br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" target="_blank">AAikman@lrrc.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" target="_blank">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>><br>
>> <br>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 11:58 AM<br>
>To: Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com" target="_blank">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a><br>
><mailto:<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com" target="_blank">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>><br>
>>; <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>> <br>
>Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Final Compromise Proposal for the<br>
>Prioritization of IDN applications<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Thanks Jeff. The net effect seems to boil down to the following:<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>First batch of 500: The first 125 idn applications (or any lesser<br>
>number)<br>
>requesting priority processing get processed first. 375 “mixed”<br>
>(non-idn<br>
>and idns not requesting priority) get processed next. (Could be a<br>
>bigger<br>
>number if fewer than 125 idns request priority, in which case, you are<br>
>done<br>
>with idn priority.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Second and subsequent batches of 500: If any idn applications<br>
>requesting<br>
>priority remain, the first 50 to have applied for priority get<br>
>processed<br>
>first, then 450 “mixed” (non-idn and idns not requesting priority) get<br>
>processed in each batch. If the remainder of idn applications<br>
>requesting<br>
>priority in the second or any subsequent batch of 500 is less than 50,<br>
>then<br>
>the mix changes to accommodate all idns requesting priority and the<br>
>rest of<br>
>the batch is filled with “mixed” applications.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Is the above a correct description?<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Separately, would there be any point in my bringing up a recommendation<br>
>to<br>
>grant some percentage of priority processing to Community applications?<br>
> Do<br>
>we have any standing GAC Advice on the point about Community<br>
>Applications<br>
>other than the GAC’s urging that we take into account the opinions<br>
>expressed<br>
>on this in the Council of Europe report on Community applications? <br>
>(Once<br>
>again I am looking at how to shorten times to agreement on policy that<br>
>may<br>
>end up as a bottleneck at the ICANN Board. I don’t think anyone on the<br>
>Board is in the mood to make policy decisions where GNSO and GAC Advice<br>
>conflict. They will just tell us to go back and “work it out.” Go back<br>
>and<br>
>work it out means delay.<br>
><br>
>Anne<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a><br>
><mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> > On Behalf Of Jeff Neuman<br>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:47 AM<br>
>To: <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>> <br>
>Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Final Compromise Proposal for the<br>
>Prioritization<br>
>of IDN applications<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>[EXTERNAL]<br>
><br>
> _____ <br>
><br>
>All,<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Thank you all for your thoughtful comments on the previous proposals<br>
>for the<br>
>processing of applications. I have assembled the comments and offer<br>
>this as<br>
>proposed text for the draft final report. I first lay out what the<br>
>existing section states followed by the proposed new language:<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>EXISTING LANGUAGE<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>No Agreement: The Working Group notes that in the 2012 round a decision<br>
>was<br>
>made by ICANN Org to prioritize applications for IDN strings. Although<br>
>there<br>
>was a 30-day public comment period, the decision to prioritize IDN<br>
>strings<br>
>was never subject to policy review. Although the Working Group received<br>
>a<br>
>number of comments on this issue (both in support and against), the<br>
>Working<br>
>Group was not able to come to agreement as to whether IDN applications<br>
>should receive any priority in subsequent rounds. <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>PROPOSED NEW LANGUAGE<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Affirmation with modification (Rationale xx): If the volume of<br>
>applications<br>
>received significantly exceeds 500, applications will be processed in<br>
>batches of 500.*<br>
><br>
>*In the 2012 round, the Section 1.1.2.5 of the Applicant Guidebook<br>
>provided<br>
>that the first batch would consist of 500 applications, but each<br>
>subsequent<br>
>batch was to be only 400 applications. For ease, the Working Group has<br>
>modified this to an even 500 applications per batch. (See Applicant<br>
>Guidebook, page I-9).<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Recommendation (Rationale xx): The Working Group notes that in the<br>
>2012<br>
>round a decision was made by ICANN Org to prioritize applications for<br>
>IDN<br>
>strings. Although there was a 30-day public comment period, the<br>
>decision to<br>
>prioritize IDN strings was never subject to policy review. For<br>
>Subsequent<br>
>rounds, the Working Group recommends that the following formula must be<br>
>used<br>
>with respect to giving priority to Internationalized Domain Name<br>
>applications:<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>a) First Batch of 500<br>
><br>
>a. If there are more than 125 applications for IDN strings that<br>
>elect<br>
>to participate in the prioritization draw, the first 25% of<br>
>applications<br>
>processed in the first batch shall be those applications for IDN<br>
>strings<br>
>that elect to participate in the prioritization draw. The remaining<br>
>75% of<br>
>applications in the first batch shall consist of both IDN and non-IDN<br>
>applications that elect to participate in the prioritization draw. <br>
><br>
>b. If there are less than 125 applications for IDN strings that<br>
>elect<br>
>to participate in the prioritization draw, then all such applications<br>
>shall<br>
>be processed in the first batch prior to any non-IDN application.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>b) Each Subsequent Batch of those electing to participate in the<br>
>Prioritization Draw<br>
><br>
>a. For each subsequent batch. the first 10% of each batch of<br>
>applications must consist of IDN applications until there are no more<br>
>IDN<br>
>applications. <br>
><br>
>b. The remaining applications in each batch shall be selected at<br>
>random<br>
>out of the pool of IDN and non-IDN applications that remain.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>c) Processing of Applications which do not elect to participate<br>
>in the<br>
>Prioritization Draw<br>
><br>
>a. When all of the applications that have elected to participate<br>
>in<br>
>the Prioritization Draw have been processed, ICANN shall process the<br>
>remaining applications is batches of 500 applications.<br>
><br>
>b. The first 10% of each batch of applications must consist of IDN<br>
>applications until there are no more IDN applications. <br>
><br>
>c. The remaining applications in each batch shall be selected at<br>
>random out of the pool of IDN and non-IDN applications that remain.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> Example: Assume ICANN receives 3,000 applications. There are 1,200<br>
>applications for IDN strings and 1,800 applications for non-IDN<br>
>strings.<br>
>1,000 of the IDN strings and 1,000 of the non-IDN strings elect to<br>
>participate in the prioritization draw. The remaining 200 IDN string<br>
>and<br>
>800 non-IDN strings have declined to participate in the Prioritization<br>
>Draw.<br>
>ICANN shall place the applications in 6 batches of 500 applications in<br>
>the<br>
>following manner:<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Batch 1:<br>
><br>
>125 of the 1,000 IDN applications (selected during the prioritization<br>
>draw)<br>
>shall be processed first. The remaining 750 IDN-applications shall be<br>
>combined with the 1,000 non-IDN applications. Of those 1,750<br>
>applications,<br>
>375 of them shall be selected at random to be processed in the first<br>
>batch.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Batch 2:<br>
><br>
>Assume there are 700 IDN applications and 800 non-IDN applications<br>
>remaining<br>
>that have elected to participate in the prioritization draw. In the<br>
>second<br>
>batch, the first 50 applications processed shall be for IDN strings<br>
>selected<br>
>at random. The remaining 450 applications processed in the second<br>
>batch<br>
>shall be selected at random from the pool of both the 800 non-IDN<br>
>applications and the remaining 650 IDN applications.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Batch 3:<br>
><br>
>Assume that there are now 400 IDN applications and 600 non-IDN<br>
>applications<br>
>that have elected to participate in the prioritization draw. In the<br>
>third<br>
>batch, the first 50 applications processed shall be for IDN strings<br>
>selected<br>
>at random. The remaining 450 applications processed in the second<br>
>batch<br>
>shall be selected at random from the pool of both the 600 non-IDN<br>
>applications and the remaining 400 IDN applications.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Batch 4<br>
><br>
>Assume there are now only 25 IDN applications and 475 non-IDN<br>
>applications<br>
>for the last batch that has elected to participate in the<br>
>prioritization<br>
>draw. In this case only 5% of the last batch is comprised of IDN<br>
>applications. Therefore all of the remaining IDN applications will be<br>
>processed in the last batch prior to the remaining 475 non-IDN strings.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Batch 5: <br>
><br>
>There are now 200 IDN strings and 800 non-IDN strings that have elected<br>
>not<br>
>to participate in the prioritization draw. The first 50 applications<br>
>process<br>
>in Batch 5 shall be IDN strings. The remaining 450 applications<br>
>process<br>
>shall be selected at random from the pool of both the 800 non-IDN<br>
>applications and the remaining 150 IDN applications.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Batch 6:<br>
><br>
>Assume of the remaining 500 applications, 30 of them are for IDN<br>
>strings and<br>
>470 of them are for non-IDN strings. In this case only 7.5% of the<br>
>last<br>
>batch is comprised of IDN applications. Therefore all of the remaining<br>
>IDN<br>
>applications will be processed in the last batch prior to the remaining<br>
>470<br>
>non-IDN strings.<br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Jeff Neuman<br>
><br>
>Senior Vice President <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
>Com Laude | Valideus<br>
>1751 Pinnacle Drive <br>
><br>
>Suite 600, McLean<br>
><br>
>VA 22102, USA<br>
><br>
><br>
>M: +1.202.549.5079<br>
><br>
>D: +1.703.635.7514<br>
><br>
>E: <mailto:<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com" target="_blank">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>> <a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com" target="_blank">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a><br>
> <<a href="http://www.comlaude.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.comlaude.com/</a>> <a href="http://www.comlaude.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.comlaude.com</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> _____ <br>
><br>
>The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the<br>
>intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any<br>
>way<br>
>by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this<br>
>message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of<br>
>the<br>
>email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently<br>
>delete<br>
>it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any<br>
>responsibility<br>
>for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check<br>
>this<br>
>email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept<br>
>liability for<br>
>statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of<br>
>the<br>
>group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes<br>
>Nom-IQ<br>
>Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with<br>
>company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell<br>
>Street,<br>
>London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in<br>
>England<br>
>and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30<br>
>Little<br>
>Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company<br>
>registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its<br>
>registered<br>
>office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland;<br>
>Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at<br>
>1751<br>
>Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan)<br>
>Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office<br>
>at<br>
>Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further<br>
>information see <a href="http://www.comlaude.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.comlaude.com</a> <<a href="https://comlaude.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://comlaude.com</a>> <br>
><br>
> <br>
><br>
> _____ <br>
><br>
><br>
>This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the<br>
>individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this<br>
>message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee<br>
>or<br>
>agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the<br>
>intended<br>
>recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution<br>
>or<br>
>copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If<br>
>you<br>
>have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately<br>
>by<br>
>replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and<br>
>any<br>
>attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and<br>
>confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the<br>
>Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. <br>
><br>
> _____ <br>
><br>
>The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the<br>
>intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any<br>
>way<br>
>by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this<br>
>message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of<br>
>the<br>
>email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently<br>
>delete<br>
>it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any<br>
>responsibility<br>
>for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check<br>
>this<br>
>email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept<br>
>liability for<br>
>statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of<br>
>the<br>
>group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes<br>
>Nom-IQ<br>
>Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with<br>
>company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell<br>
>Street,<br>
>London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in<br>
>England<br>
>and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30<br>
>Little<br>
>Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company<br>
>registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its<br>
>registered<br>
>office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland;<br>
>Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at<br>
>1751<br>
>Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan)<br>
>Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office<br>
>at<br>
>Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further<br>
>information see <a href="http://www.comlaude.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.comlaude.com</a> <<a href="https://comlaude.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://comlaude.com</a>> <br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
><br>
>_______________________________________________<br>
>Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br>
><a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><br>
>_______________________________________________<br>
>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your<br>
>personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list<br>
>accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy<br>
>(<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service<br>
>(<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link<br>
>above to change your membership status or configuration, including<br>
>unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery<br>
>altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</blockquote></div>