All, A reminder that at the November 13th meeting, the Council was encouraged and I believe committed to discuss prospective policy work on Name Collision. We will need to provide a form of response to the NGPC as to our intentions in this respect. Note the questions that we called out in the staff paper on this subject are copied below. Given the aforementioned factors, the GNSO Council may want to consider, amongst others, the following questions in deciding whether there is need for work towards a comprehensive policy to manage the risks of name collisions in gTLDs: * What measures, if any, should be taken to manage the name collision risks for future rounds of new gTLDs? * What additional measures, if any, should be taken to manage the name collision risks for 2012-round gTLDs beyond their 2-year anniversary of delegation? * What measures, if any, should be taken to manage the name collision risks for gTLDs delegated before the 2012 round? * Should there be any safeguards regarding the practice of "domain drop catching" and similar services in gTLDs? * Is any further data needed on the effectiveness of the current mitigation measures or other aspects of name collision before policy development could start? * If there is policy work, should SSAC be invited to provide its advice given the nature of the issues? * Is policy development the best approach to develop such measures and/or safeguards, or are there other methods by which this work could be undertaken (i.e., is the outcome expected to result in consensus policy recommendations which would require a policy development process)? Please note also that the above are (staff) indications of where policy work may be appropriate and not necessarily areas where work should be done. That scope is up to us. Thank-you, Jonathan From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@icann.org] Sent: 12 November 2014 14:34 To: GNSO Council List Subject: [council] Name Collision - staff expert participation required? Dear All, In relation to agenda item 6 - name collision (see below), Fransisco Arias has indicated that he is available to join the Council meeting tomorrow should there be any further questions in relation to the staff paper or other technical questions relating to this issue. If you anticipate that his input may be required to help inform the Council deliberations on what further action, if any, should be taken on this topic, please let me know (off-list) by today 20.00 UTC at the latest so I can inform him accordingly. Of course, should any questions arise during the meeting that were not originally anticipated, we can always pass these on after the meeting for a response. Best regards, Marika Item 6: - UPDATE - Name Collision (15 mins) On the 30 July 2014, the New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board directed staff to "provide information to, and work with the GNSO to consider whether policy work on developing a long-term plan to manage gTLD name collision issues should be undertaken." ICANN Staff submitted this paper to the GNSO Council on 7 October 2014 (see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/name-collision-gnso-policy-07oct 14-en.pdf) and it was presented to the Council during the ICANN meeting in Los Angeles. Council members agreed in Los Angeles to discuss with their respective group what further action, if any, should be taken on this topic and report back accordingly during this meeting. Furthermore, a letter <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/namazi-to-robinson-30oct14-en.pdf> was received from Cyrus Namazi offering any additional information or assistance that ICANN Staff can provide to further assist the Council in its deliberations. This is an opportunity for the Council to discuss which steps, if any, it would like to take in relation to this topic. 6.1 Discussion 6.2 Next steps