GNSO Council approach to new gtld policy
To: Chair, ICANN Board CC: ICANN Secretary Hello Vint, The GNSO Council in its meeting of 1 September 2005, made the following decision with respect to an approach for considering the development of a comprehensive policy for new gTLDs. I have attached a draft paper under development within the GNSO that outlines the GNSO approach to addressing new gtld policy issues. The Council decided to handle the work on new gtlds as three parallel work streams: (1) Complete the evaluation of the introduction of the limited number of new gTLDS, including considering the process and introduction of the most recent new gTLDS (e.g .travel, .mobi, and .jobs). (2) A single policy development process which would look at issues including * whether to continue to introduce new gTLDs * the criteria for approving applications for new gTLDs * the allocation method, assuming that there was a limit to how many gTLDs could be introduced at once * the key contractual conditions for those gTLDs which might include conditions such as : escrow policies, obligation to use an ICANN accredited registrar etc. (3) A policy development process to be undertaken in collaboration with the ccNSO for the introduction of new TLDs that use an internationalized domain name string The GNSO will be seeking a budget to obtain expert advice to assist in these policy development initiatives. The GNSO will be fleshing out the draft approach in consultation with ICANN staff, and will keep the Board informed of developments. Once the GNSO Council has a clear work program with timelines, the GNSO Council will request a meeting with the ICANN Board to discuss in more detail. Regards, Bruce Tonkin Chair, GNSO Council
Bruce, Council, apologies again for not being able to join you on last week's gTLDs call but I was unable to leave a meeting in Berlin as I had hoped to do. Nevertheless, I am pleased to see that I believe Council made the right decision re next steps. It was clear from page 17 line 38 of Olaf's excellent document that in May 2003 the GNSO council in responding to the Board had proposed a PDP to consider " a set of objective criteria" for further gTLDs. There is further guidance on Council's intention in the minutes of that meeting. To my mind Council had been waiting since then for Board reaction. The outcome of the call last week is to confirm that earlier Council resolution, provide some extra detail and to go ahead with a PDP. This is good work and the right direction. We should be thoughtful, as we begin our work, on what we intend by objective criteria. Philip.
participants (2)
-
Bruce Tonkin -
Philip Sheppard