<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta name=Title content=""><meta name=Keywords content=""><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Arial;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:DengXian;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;
color:#44546A;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle26
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle27
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle28
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle29
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.msoIns
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-style-name:"";
text-decoration:underline;
color:teal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi Kal,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thank you for taking a look at the flowchart and providing feedback. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>>>>-There is no path out of the 3-4-5 loop unless agreement is reached. If CSC and PTI can't reach agreement on an initial Remedial Action Plan, then perhaps it should be escalated to step 8. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Good point. Would three iterations of a draft remedial action plan be sufficient to try and reach agreement, or do you suggest a different number of iterations. To represent the number of iterations in the flowchart, we could have a decision box between #5 and #3 asking is this a third draft. If it is a third draft it could then escalate to #8 instead of going to #3. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>>>>-Step 7 may require some form of measurement over time, especially if the persistent issue applies to something that occurs only rarely. To make a satisfactory assessment, the CSC may need to observe several iterations of the metric being within SLAs. I'm not sure how that would be (or even if it needs to be) represented in the workflow.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>A good topic to discuss on the upcoming CSC call.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>>>>-Steps 14 and 15 are not collaborative. That is, the steps read as if the ICANN CEO creates and presents the corrective action plan to the CSC. Is this intentional? I've reread the proposed RAP in the document. In particular the message content and response rows and columns, which I believe inform the actions in the workflow diagram. IMO these suggest that 2nd and 3rd escalations should follow the collaborative discussion process proposed for the 1st notice, with new participants.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Seems reasonable to make those steps collaborative also. Good catch.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thanks for your feedback.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>--Elise</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='color:black'>"Feher, Kal" <Kalman.Feher@team.neustar><br><b>Date: </b>Monday, August 14, 2017 at 10:38 PM<br><b>To: </b>Elise Gerich <elise.gerich@iana.org>, Allan MacGillivray <allan.macgillivray@cira.ca>, "Gannon, James-1" <james-1.gannon@novartis.com>, "ICANN-CSC@icann.org" <ICANN-CSC@icann.org><br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [ICANN-CSC] [Ext] RE: Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>I apologise if I am late to the discussion of the Remedial Action Procedures, but I have a few comments on the workflow document.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Firstly thank you for the diagram. It is very useful in terms of visualising the process.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Referring to the numbered workflow items:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>-There is no path out of the 3-4-5 loop unless agreement is reached. If CSC and PTI can't reach agreement on an initial Remedial Action Plan, then perhaps it should be escalated to step 8. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>-Step 7 may require some form of measurement over time, especially if the persistent issue applies to something that occurs only rarely. To make a satisfactory assessment, the CSC may need to observe several iterations of the metric being within SLAs. I'm not sure how that would be (or even if it needs to be) represented in the workflow.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>-Steps 14 and 15 are not collaborative. That is, the steps read as if the ICANN CEO creates and presents the corrective action plan to the CSC. Is this intentional? I've reread the proposed RAP in the document. In particular the message content and response rows and columns, which I believe inform the actions in the workflow diagram. IMO these suggest that 2nd and 3rd escalations should follow the collaborative discussion process proposed for the 1st notice, with new participants.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>I also find the use of Remedial Action Procedures (entry into workflow) and Remedial Action Plan (Steps 3,6,10 and11) a little confusing. I'd love to use more distinct terms.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#262626'>Kal Feher</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='color:black'><<a href="mailto:icann-csc-bounces@icann.org">icann-csc-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Elise Gerich <<a href="mailto:elise.gerich@iana.org">elise.gerich@iana.org</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Tuesday, 15 August 2017 at 07:39<br><b>To: </b>Allan MacGillivray <<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca">allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a>>, "Gannon, James-1" <<a href="mailto:james-1.gannon@novartis.com">james-1.gannon@novartis.com</a>>, "<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>[EXTERNAL] Re: [ICANN-CSC] [Ext] RE: Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>All,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>To those of you who may have missed the Remedial Procedures workflow that Marilia drafted, I have attached it for your review.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>--Elise</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><b><span style='color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='color:black'>Elise Gerich <<a href="mailto:elise.gerich@iana.org">elise.gerich@iana.org</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Friday, August 11, 2017 at 5:11 PM<br><b>To: </b>Allan MacGillivray <<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca">allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a>>, "Gannon, James-1" <<a href="mailto:james-1.gannon@novartis.com">james-1.gannon@novartis.com</a>>, "<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [Ext] RE: [ICANN-CSC] Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi Allan,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Glad to see that we both read the Naming function contract in the same way. Yes, Section 8.1 defines the Complaint Resolution process, and it is within this process that PTI notifies the CSC when a complainant initiates a formal escalation. And it Section 8.2 which defines the Problem Resolution Process that might trigger the Remedial action procedures. Marilia was kind enough to draft a workflow diagram that depicts this progression.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Like you, I also like the distinction between complaint and problem, and I hope that we are on the same page now.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Have a nice weekend.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><b><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>--Elise</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><b><span style='color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='color:black'>Allan MacGillivray <<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca">allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:54 PM<br><b>To: </b>Elise Gerich <<a href="mailto:elise.gerich@iana.org">elise.gerich@iana.org</a>>, "Gannon, James-1" <<a href="mailto:james-1.gannon@novartis.com">james-1.gannon@novartis.com</a>>, "<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>RE: [Ext] RE: [ICANN-CSC] Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Elise – ah, now I see where you are coming from. There are <u>two</u> separate ‘escalation processes’: One for ‘individual complaints’ which are not found to be ‘performance issues’ which can be escalated all the way up to an IRP, which the Naming Functions Contract refers to as the ‘Complaint Resolution Process’. And a second escalation process for ‘individual complaints’ found to be ‘performance issues’ which can involve invoking the RAPs, which the contract refers to as the ‘Problem Resolution Process’. Personally, I like the distinction made between ‘complaint’ and ‘problem’. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'>I know that the CSC’s report refers to ‘escalations’ in the sense of complaints that have been elevated to management. However, the CSC is not able to review ‘individual complaints’ to determine if there is a performance issue until after the complainant has gone to the ICANN Ombudsman. So, I am not sure just what ‘an escalation’ is meant to refer to. I would add that the Naming Functions Contract does not use the term ‘escalation’ in the way that you propose it, as a noun, as in ‘an escalation’. Rather it only uses it as an adjective, as in ‘escalation procedure’ or ‘escalation processes’. Perhaps the CSC Report should refer to ‘Outstanding Complaints’ rather than ‘Escalations’, as should, heaven forbid, we get into a situation where the RAPs have been invoked we will need to then report on two ‘escalation process’, one for ‘complaints’ and one for ‘problems’ which would be almost as confusing as this debate we are having. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Allan</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif'> Elise Gerich [<a href="mailto:elise.gerich@iana.org">mailto:elise.gerich@iana.org</a>] <br><b>Sent:</b> August-10-17 3:49 PM<br><b>To:</b> Allan MacGillivray; Gannon, James-1; <a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ext] RE: [ICANN-CSC] Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Allan – Sorry to have you scratching your head. I was looking to have consistency with the Naming Functions Contract. In the Naming Functions Contract in Section 8.1 (a) it says:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>“If the Complaint is not so resolved, the Complainant may escalate the matter in writing to Contractor’s management team, in which case Contractor shall notify the CSC. “</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>My reading of the sequence envisioned by the Naming Functions Contract is slightly different than what you wrote and the difference is in step 1. It would be: 1) the complainant escalates to Contrator’s management and the CSC is notified; and then 2) if the escalation is found to represent a persistent performance issue, then 3) the CSC may invoke the Remedial Action Procedures. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hope that clarifies the reason for the suggestion.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thanks,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><b><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>--Elise</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><b><span style='color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='color:black'>Allan MacGillivray <<a href="mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca">allan.macgillivray@cira.ca</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 12:34 PM<br><b>To: </b>Elise Gerich <<a href="mailto:elise.gerich@iana.org">elise.gerich@iana.org</a>>, "Gannon, James-1" <<a href="mailto:james-1.gannon@novartis.com">james-1.gannon@novartis.com</a>>, "<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>[Ext] RE: [ICANN-CSC] Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Elise – you have me scratching my head on this one. I believe you are referring to this section: </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'>“The CSC will review individual complaints with a view to identifying whether any patterns of poor performance issues exist and if so, to invoke the Remedial Action procedures if necessary” (text reflects the proposed changes). </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'>My reading of the sequence envisaged in this section is : 1) The ‘individual complaint’ is reviewed by the CSC, and then 2) <i><u>if</u></i> found to represent a ‘performance issue’, then 3) the CSC <i><u>may</u></i> invoke the Remedial Action Procedures 4) at which point the ‘individual complaint would become an ‘escalation’. I would also add that even if an individual complaint is found to constitute a performance issue, the complainant is still permitted to continue to seek an individual (e.g. non-RAP) resolution, including using an IRP. So my sense is that we should leave the term ‘individual complaint’ intact in this clause. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Allan</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif'><a href="mailto:icann-csc-bounces@icann.org">icann-csc-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:icann-csc-bounces@icann.org">mailto:icann-csc-bounces@icann.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Elise Gerich<br><b>Sent:</b> August-10-17 2:53 PM<br><b>To:</b> Gannon, James-1; <a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [ICANN-CSC] Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi all,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>In addition to the feedback from James, I would like to suggest replacing the words “individual complaints” with “escalations” in the sentence about patterns of poor performance. While it may seem like a minor point I think the distinction is worth making.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thank you,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><b><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>--Elise</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.0in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='color:black'><<a href="mailto:icann-csc-bounces@icann.org">icann-csc-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of "Gannon, James-1" <<a href="mailto:james-1.gannon@novartis.com">james-1.gannon@novartis.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 6:17 AM<br><b>To: </b>"<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [ICANN-CSC] Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'>Hi all,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'>Some feedback that I would like to discuss, I would like to suggest that the references to the IANA functions operator remain as drafted and not be changed to reflect the current IFO which is PTI, this distinction was important during the CWG to allow for a framework to move to a future IFO that may not be PTI and may not be associated with ICANN.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'>While I understand that this may seem like a minor point I think its an important distinction.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'>Also the reporting on any remedial actions taken should be reported to the GNSO as a whole alongside the ccNSO rather than just the RySG in my opinion.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'>Thanks in advance and happy to discuss on the call,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in;text-autospace:none'><b><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black'>James Gannon</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:8.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black'>IGM Manager – Projects & IT Security SME</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#44546A'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><a href="mailto:icann-csc-bounces@icann.org">icann-csc-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:icann-csc-bounces@icann.org">mailto:icann-csc-bounces@icann.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Maria Otanes<br><b>Sent:</b> 10 August 2017 14:11<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:ICANN-CSC@icann.org">ICANN-CSC@icann.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> [ICANN-CSC] Agenda: CSC Meeting 13, 17 August, 20:00-21:30 UTC</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Dear CSC,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Please find the agenda for the August CSC meeting below and attached. The next call will be held next <b>Thursday, 17 August, at 20:00 UTC</b>.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>The attached documents can also be found on the Wiki agenda page: <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_TBEhB&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=pXgd7rUFmOGPSaTcf3kROMV5Rt3fTXejagLVImG-D14&m=3mxJPjWAGheBfACb9jjuXSCImrFOcQW2s6Wc_n_IWsk&s=WPp05oE6KNa3RtVpo-y-zHMbVaDZXbTi91Il0CO6QAs&e=">https://community.icann.org/x/TBEhB[community.icann.org]</a></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>All the best,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Ria</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>----------</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Customer Standing Committee (CSC) Meeting 13</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>17 August 2017 @ 20:00 – 21:30 UTC</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:16.0pt'> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in'>1.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Welcome and Introduction</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in'>2.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Action items (only report on open items)</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Action 12 2017 01 Elise G going forward PTI reports should be based on new methodology. Agreed to start with update June PTI report (Completed)</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Action 12 2017 02 Bart come up with scenario's for SLE change procedure </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Action 12 2017 03 James, Byron and Bart to work on logistics for ccNSO and GNSO Council approval of changes to SLE </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Action 12 2017 04 Elaine to circulate to CSC proposed changes to CSC charter (Completed)</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Action 12 2017 05 Byron to put forward sketch of first year annual reporting framework (August meeting) to present to community in Abu Dhabi</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in'>3.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:black'>PTI Performance July 2017</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:3.0in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:black'>a.</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:black'> PTI report to CSC</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:3.0in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:black'>b.</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:black'> CSC report</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in'>4.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Update from Remedial Action Procedures Working Group</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:2.75in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in'>5.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Update on Procedure for SLA Amendment</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in'>6.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Update on CSC Charter Review</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:3.25in;text-indent:-.25in'>a.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Confirm of charter adoption</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:3.25in;text-indent:-.25in'>b.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>CSC review of its charter</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in'>7.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>ICANN60 Abu Dhabi (28 October - 3 November)</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:3.25in;text-indent:-.25in'>a.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Outline Annual Update/Report (action 05, see above)</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:3.25in;text-indent:-.25in'>b.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Proposed Meetings schedule </span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:3.25in;text-indent:-.25in'>c.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Outline Presentations: What needs to be included?</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:3.75in;text-indent:-9.0pt'><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span>i.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Topics</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:3.75in;text-indent:-9.0pt'><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span>ii.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Full-deck and Summary deck?</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:2.5in;line-height:115%'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%'> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:115%'>8.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;color:black'>AOB</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:2.75in;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:115%'>9.<span style='font-size:7.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;color:black'>Adjourn</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:2.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:2.5in'><br>Novartis Ireland Ltd.<br>Registered No. 11931, Ireland.<br>Registered Office: The Vista Building, Elm Park Business Park, Merrion Road, Dublin 4. DO4 A9N6, Ireland.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:2.5in'>Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>