[council] RE: GNSO Review of the GAC Communique

["Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Susan and Rubens

I've made some changes and added a comment. While, I did use track changes I'm 
not confident my suggested changes are easily recognisable, so I'll summarise 
them here for ease of reference.

Future gTLD Rounds:

As the GAC has outlined there are many ongoing reviews that address the new 
gTLD program.



The original word was PDPs and I changed this to reviews because I felt this 
better reflected the work efforts currently underway and is more consistent 
with the references in the GAC communique.

I also asked a question for the Council in response to the text: The community 
along with the board should make it a priority to ensure that there is a 
logical sequence in the review and resulting policy review.

Is this something the GNSO should take the lead on? The RySG and RrSG have 
raised this issue with the Board on a number of occasions. Bruce Tonkin is of 
the view that there are two efforts that need to be complete before the launch 
of any new gTLDs: the CCT RT and the Subsequent Round PDP.

I also marked up the text on underserved regions to make it more specific, but 
I don't believe I changed the intent:
The GNSO council agrees that raising awareness of any future efforts to 
introduce new gTLDs in the underserved regions should be an important 
consideration. However, we would also like to note that having gTLD registry 
operators is only one part of the problem since registrants also need 
registrars or resellers with local language and payment method support.


PPSAI
I added a sentence to the response on this issue which some folks may think is 
too blunt, so I'm okay to delete if others are uncomfortable with it:
The Council notes that the GAC provided comments on the PPSAI Final Report via 
the Public Safety Working Group, which were considered by the Working Group. It 
is the hope of the Council that the GAC will not use the opportunity to discuss 
the Final Report of the WG as an opportunity to discuss new concerns.

Thanks

Donna

Donna Austin: Neustar, Inc.
Policy and Industry Affairs Manager
Cell: +1.310.890.9655 Email: 
donna.austin@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:donna.austin@xxxxxxxxxxx>

________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify me immediately and delete the original message.
Follow Neustar:   [cid:image001.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  
Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc>   
[cid:image002.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  
LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349>   
[cid:image003.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/neustar>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Susan Kawaguchi
Sent: Monday, 4 April 2016 3:43 PM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] GNSO Review of the GAC Communique

Hello All,

Please see the attached review of the GAC Communique and the motion for 
consideration at the April Council meeting.

Best regards,

Susan Kawaguchi
Domain Name Manager
Facebook Legal Dept.

Attachment: Final GNSO Review of GAC Communique with Rubens edits - Marrakech - 11 March 201611_DA.docx
Description: Final GNSO Review of GAC Communique with Rubens edits - Marrakech - 11 March 201611_DA.docx