NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=utf-8
Date:
Thu, 9 May 2019 16:04:26 +0200
Reply-To:
Johan Helsingius <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Auction proceeds - second public comment period needed?
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
Sender:
NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]>
From:
Johan Helsingius <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (10 lines) 
One of the questions coming out of the CCWG Auction Proceeds
call this week is whether a second public comment period is
desirable, and if so, what the minimum duration for the comment
period should be. This is in light of the actions being taken
in response to the first comment period:

https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102138829/new%20gTLD%20AP%20CCWG%20Agreements%20-%20updated%2022%20April%202019.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1555965919000&api=v2

	Julf

ATOM RSS1 RSS2