<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" 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 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:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:7758616;
mso-list-template-ids:-1495485166;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:504247734;
mso-list-template-ids:-2093685136;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="en-BE" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:17.0pt;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">NOTES | ccPDP3 Review Mechanism WG | 26 Jan 2022 (20 UTC)</span></b><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"> </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">1. Welcome</span></b><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Welcome by Chair Stephen Deerhake</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Thanks to all, including Vice Chair</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">2. Administrative matters</span></b><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Public comment period on ccPDP3-RET closed. Four comments were received:</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">RySG in support of the proposed policy<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">ALAC in support but additional clarity on reviews<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">BSC specific points regarding the policy<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Individual comment from .su: request additional clarification on applicability<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Comments are directed at the ICANN Board not at the ccPDP3-WG or the ccNSO Council</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel: comment. Need closer attention to the Bylaws and the process the Board will be going through. Requirements for rejecting. It’s in the hands of the Board.
They should be approving it.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: Board decided to create an ad hoc group. Group is almost ready to start. Members have not been appointed yet. Katrina, Patricio, Becky and Avri will
most likely be there. They will advise the board on the course of action. We welcome your comments, if there is anything that needs to be brought to the attention of the ad hoc group</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Stephen: What timeline for the ad hoc group?</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: Various steps. Ad hoc group since none of the Board WGs seems to be appropriate for this matter. Policy from the ccNSO does not go often to the Board.
This group is also tasked with proposing how to deal with policy from the ccNSO in the future. No timeline. But asap. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Stephen: Is there concern ccNSO is kicked out of policy? Is there something the ccNSO might have done out of band? Not within bylaws</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: no concern at all. Itinerary is in place for GNSO policy, but no itinerary in place for the ccNSO </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Stephen: transparency from the ad hoc group? What will be on the website regarding the work by the ad hoc group?</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: do not know. Standards for the current WGs and committees will be in place</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel: remember section 15 </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: not inventing new procedures. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">3. Review: process flow chart</span></b><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Adjusted to the new version, using arbitrators. No longer a panel.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel: the flowchart describes the process of internal review, but not the process of appeal?</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Low level detail.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: this is a flowchart about what the steps will be. (high level)</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel: more clarity needed for non-lawyers. “Review” has different meanings</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">4. Review: non-binding mechanism document - revised (attached)</span></b><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"> </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: annex to the doc. We can chat about it offline</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Significant changes on the scope. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">What can be appealed by who? We looked at each of the processes. Result of looking in detail at what a delegation is, who is involved, by when a response, eligibility for review, etc.
what does it imply for the eligibility to request a review. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">2 lines of inquiry vs a request for an appeal? Did iana follow its procedures, and was this done fairly and in line with the policies we have and IFO?</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: line 82. Should it be “or” instead of “and”? </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: yes.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: line 88. This looks like a range. Both numbers seem to be intended to be the maximum</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: will fix</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel: line 88. Why would anybody pay 100.000 dollars for a non-binding arbitration?</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: will talk about that later</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Eberhard: costs. Not who pays for it.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: 3 arbitrators. Finances. Did not make sense. To discuss. 2 other options added:</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Review by administrator only. Risky, but limited costs<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Review by a single administrator<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Choice by the manager.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Eberhard: issues with the cost. Both parties will share the costs of the selected arbitrator evenly. Not fair. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: good point. We should no longer have the 3-person panel, it is too expensive</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel: internal review. What is needed is the analogue of the utility review schemes where by there is a Final Response letter from ICANN/IANA.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: I think the preferred term for that “internal review” would be “reconsideration”</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: internal review is already used by the IFO.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Eberhard: was previously discussed.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel: no internal review of what the IFO has done through a more senior person in the organisation</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Eberhard: we addressed this</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: we can run through the discussions which explained the models</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Stephen: 5th reading regarding non-binding mechanism language</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel was not present in the earlier discussions, the group agreed to go down that path previously. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: can talk to Nigel offline, explain where we came from</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: defining what a significant issue is</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Eberhard: we must define what received is</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: yes. See later</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Page 1.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Eberhard: if an application for a not entitles applicant is received, where none of the requirements for local residents. All boxes unticked. Would that not be rejected?</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: yes. If the applicant wants to pay the money to look at this, that is their choice. If you predetermine that they do not meet the requirements, you end up with more errors, fairness.
But indeed, if the boxes are not met, they can indeed start the process.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Administrator can work with the applicant</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Ifo points out the issues that need to be addressed by the applicant. IFO keeps explaining they keep not meeting the basic requirements until the applicant gets tired.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Stephen: comment by Kim</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Kim: good summary. We point out defects in the application</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: no formal IFO process for a revocation. If a notice of revocation is sent to a manager, the current manager can use the process to appeal it. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Patricio: we should be aware that in terms of revocation.. Party that does not have a standing. Issue might come up during public comment.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: what is the official process for this. The IFO set out the conditions</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Eberhard: only reason for revocation is substantial misconduct. I do not want people applying for revocation, and each party can use an appeal. Agrees with the way it is written here.
Revocation has never happened. If it does, there is a good reason for it. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Nigel: we need to think about principles. Any decision should be subject to an appeals process (inaudible)</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: let’s park this.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Bernie: 2 more points. See retirement process. Yellow text earlier in the doc. We will revisit at the next meeting. This is about standing. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">6. AOB</span></b><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Irina: you might know that there is currently an icann operating plan under public comment. SOPC is to provide comments. One of the issues that came to mind, is whether the policy development
processes have enough resources allocated from ICANN org. Recalls this group having sent a letter to icann legal in October, and still no response. Is this because of the lack of resources? Or other reasons? To be included in the comments to the strategic
and operating plans for the next years?</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Stephen: indeed. Was in the joint SCBO and SOPC today. Yes to those concerns. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Irina: appreciates the support from the ccNSO Secretariat. But is there a lack of resources from other parts of icann org? </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Stephen: can take this offline</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Eberhard: we need to discuss this here.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">As a Vice Chair, and Chair of Tech WG i do not feel undersupported by icann. Secretariat supports us ably. Issue by icann legal is an issue of engaging with subject matter experts. For
future PDPs the same support is good enough. Not an issue of lack of resources. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Stephen: it is not their role. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">5. Next meetings</span></b><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"> 9 February | 20 UTC. </span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"> 23 February</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"> 16 or 23 March (ICANN73 5-10 March)</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">7. Closure</span></b><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Thank you. Bye all.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Joke Braeken<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">joke.braeken@icann.org<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>