- Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Dear Councilors, Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach. Best, Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649
Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret
On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager
ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649
Bret, Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council¹s consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual:
The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP.
The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery.
Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines. Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions. Best, Steve From: Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret
On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager
ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649
Steve and GNSO Councillors, It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here: 1. Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR 2. Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November? 3. Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary? Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing. Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August. Thanks, Jonathan From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26 To: council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Bret, Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council's consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual: The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP. The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery. Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines. Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions. Best, Steve From: Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> > Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> >, "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> " <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> > Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> > wrote: Dear Councilors, Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach. Best, Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649
Jonathan and GNSO Councillors, I¹d like to include some additional information that may further the discussion. In regards to bullets 1 and 2, in strictly adhering to timelines in the PDP Manual, publishing 31 August was the only scenario that allowed for the possibility of considering the Final Issue Report in November. However, that represented a best case scenario and could be affected by substantial public comment and/or changes to the report that may require more than the default 30 days. To the extent that the public comment summary/analysis and edits to the Final Issue Report are achievable in 30 days, that work would very likely be achievable in the 27 days that would result from a publication date of 3 September, 40 day public comment period, and delivery of the Final Issue Report on 9 November. In other words, publishing on 3 September would not necessarily prevent a November Council deliberation date. That said, if the Council prefers that the report be published on 31 August, staff is prepared to support that direction. Best, Steve From: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> Organization: Afilias Reply-To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> Date: Monday, August 24, 2015 at 12:38 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org>, "bret@uniregistry.link" <bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Steve and GNSO Councillors, It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here: 1. Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR 2. Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November? 3. Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary? Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing. Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August. Thanks, Jonathan From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26 To: council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Bret, Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council¹s consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual:
The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP.
The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery.
Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines. Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions. Best, Steve From: Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret
On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager
ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410
tel: +1.310.301.5800
fax: +1.310.823.8649
As previously indicated, the strong consensus view within the Business Constituency is to publish on September 3rd for a 60 day public comment period. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Chan Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 4:41 PM To: Jonathan Robinson; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Jonathan and GNSO Councillors, I'd like to include some additional information that may further the discussion. In regards to bullets 1 and 2, in strictly adhering to timelines in the PDP Manual, publishing 31 August was the only scenario that allowed for the possibility of considering the Final Issue Report in November. However, that represented a best case scenario and could be affected by substantial public comment and/or changes to the report that may require more than the default 30 days. To the extent that the public comment summary/analysis and edits to the Final Issue Report are achievable in 30 days, that work would very likely be achievable in the 27 days that would result from a publication date of 3 September, 40 day public comment period, and delivery of the Final Issue Report on 9 November. In other words, publishing on 3 September would not necessarily prevent a November Council deliberation date. That said, if the Council prefers that the report be published on 31 August, staff is prepared to support that direction. Best, Steve From: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Organization: Afilias Reply-To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Date: Monday, August 24, 2015 at 12:38 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>>, "bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>" <bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> Subject: RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Steve and GNSO Councillors, It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here: 1. Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR 2. Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November? 3. Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary? Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing. Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August. Thanks, Jonathan From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26 To: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Bret, Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council's consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual: The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP. The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery. Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines. Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions. Best, Steve From: Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach. Best, Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649
Hi Steve, thank you indeed for the update. I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period. Best, Volker Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson:
Steve and GNSO Councillors,
It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here:
1.Do we publish 31^st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR
2.Do we publish 3^rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November?
3.Regardless of 31 August or 3^rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary?
Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing.
Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August.
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:*Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] *Sent:* 18 August 2015 23:26 *To:* council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link *Subject:* Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Bret,
Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council’s consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual:
/The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP./
*/The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery./*
Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> *9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting* * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> *12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November ->*2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December* *Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting*
These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines.
Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions.
Best,
Steve
*From: *Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> *Date: *Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM *To: *Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> *Subject: *Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress.
On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work?
Bret
On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> *Close 13 October* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November
Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and _immediately_ putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
*Steven Chan* Sr. Policy Manager
*ICANN *12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410
tel: +1.310.301.5800
fax: +1.310.823.8649
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
I support Volker's position. I would also add, that given the considerable amount of work that was undertaken by the Discussion Group which largely scoped and informed the Issues Report, I do not see any reason to extend the comment period by an extra 20 days. It would appear from Steve's email that if we delay the posting of the Issue Report by 3 days to 3 September, it removes the possibility of the Council considering the Final Report on 19 November. Thanks Donna Donna Austin: Neustar, Inc. Policy and Industry Affairs Manager Cell: +1.310.890.9655 Email: donna.austin@neustar.biz<mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz> ________________________________ 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@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann Sent: Tuesday, 25 August 2015 1:48 AM To: jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Hi Steve, thank you indeed for the update. I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period. Best, Volker Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson: Steve and GNSO Councillors, It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here: 1. Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR 2. Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November? 3. Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary? Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing. Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August. Thanks, Jonathan From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26 To: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Bret, Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council's consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual: The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP. The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery. Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines. Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions. Best, Steve From: Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach. Best, Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649 -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
Respectfully disagreeing, it is the position of the BC that the comment period should be initiated immediately following the Council call of September 3rd, and that the comment period should be for 60 days. Publication on August 31st will render null and void this item on the proposed Council agenda for September 3: Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION & DECISION - Public Comment Period for New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report (15 minutes) At its July 2015 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the staff request<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17350.html> for an extension of the deadline for publication of the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures. The extension was viewed as necessary given the number of potential topics that had been identified by the New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group and the need to develop a proposed framework for handling those topics in a possible PDP. The Council had also discussed briefly the possible benefits of having an extended public comment period in view of the community interest in this matter. Here the Council will discuss the ramifications of extending the public comment period and decide whether or not to recommend moving forward with the idea. 4.1 - Update and presentation of possible timelines (Steve Chan) 4.2 - Council discussion 4.3 - Council decision and next steps Publishing for only 40 days will close out the comment period prior to the Dublin ICANN meeting, at which the community can be more fully informed about the Preliminary Issue Report. Really, with the second round at least several years off, what is the rush when all we are talking about is a one month delay of Council consideration of the Final Report, when that approval can still be accomplished this calendar year? Thank you for your consideration. Best to all, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Austin, Donna Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:25 PM To: Volker Greimann; jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures I support Volker's position. I would also add, that given the considerable amount of work that was undertaken by the Discussion Group which largely scoped and informed the Issues Report, I do not see any reason to extend the comment period by an extra 20 days. It would appear from Steve's email that if we delay the posting of the Issue Report by 3 days to 3 September, it removes the possibility of the Council considering the Final Report on 19 November. Thanks Donna Donna Austin: Neustar, Inc. Policy and Industry Affairs Manager Cell: +1.310.890.9655 Email: donna.austin@neustar.biz<mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz> ________________________________ 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@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann Sent: Tuesday, 25 August 2015 1:48 AM To: jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Hi Steve, thank you indeed for the update. I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period. Best, Volker Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson: Steve and GNSO Councillors, It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here: 1. Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR 2. Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November? 3. Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary? Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing. Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August. Thanks, Jonathan From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26 To: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Bret, Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council's consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual: The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP. The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery. Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines. Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions. Best, Steve From: Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach. Best, Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649 -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15
Hi Phil, Unless I am mistaken, the publication of an issues report that has already been requested by the Council by ICANN staff is not subject to a deliberation or decision by the Council. While we may deliberate, this would not impact the issues report, therefore it is of no consequence. Only after public comments have been submitted and reviewed the Council has a role to play again in deciding whether to initiate a PDP. If the report is ready, it should be published for public comment. We can therefore use the allotted time to discuss the published issues report during our meeting but I see no reason whatsoever for delaying the report for our benefit as our deliberations will not impact this in any way forseen by the bylaws. What we can then debate at our meeting is whether an extention of the standard 40 day public comment period is warranted or even required and I am open for debate on that. With respect to your question, a month is not in itself problematic, but a month here and a month there quickly adds up to another year or two. So I am very much in favor of streamlining the formal process in favor of having a good PDP effort that may as well take more time than currently expected. TL;DR: The report should be published; our discussion item will not be affected either way due to our defined role in the PDP process not being affected by publication. Best regards, Volker Am 25.08.2015 um 18:42 schrieb Phil Corwin:
Respectfully disagreeing, it is the position of the BC that the comment period should be initiated immediately following the Council call of September 3^rd , and that the comment period should be for 60 days.
Publication on August 31st will render null and void this item on the proposed Council agenda for September 3:
*_Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION & DECISION – Public Comment Period for New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report (15 minutes)_*
At its July 2015 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the staff request <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17350.html> for an extension of the deadline for publication of the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures. The extension was viewed as necessary given the number of potential topics that had been identified by the New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group and the need to develop a proposed framework for handling those topics in a possible PDP. The Council had also discussed briefly the possible benefits of having an extended public comment period in view of the community interest in this matter. Here the Council will discuss the ramifications of extending the public comment period and decide whether or not to recommend moving forward with the idea.
4.1 – Update and presentation of possible timelines (Steve Chan)
4.2 – Council discussion
4.3 – Council decision and next steps
Publishing for only 40 days will close out the comment period prior to the Dublin ICANN meeting, at which the community can be more fully informed about the Preliminary Issue Report.
Really, with the second round at least several years off, what is the rush when all we are talking about is a one month delay of Council consideration of the Final Report, when that approval can still be accomplished this calendar year?
Thank you for your consideration.
Best to all, Philip
*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*
*Virtualaw LLC*
*1155 F Street, NW*
*Suite 1050*
*Washington, DC 20004*
*202-559-8597/Direct*
*202-559-8750/Fax*
*202-255-6172/cell***
**
*Twitter: @VlawDC*
*/"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*
*From:*owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Austin, Donna *Sent:* Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:25 PM *To:* Volker Greimann; jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link *Subject:* RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
I support Volker’s position.
I would also add, that given the considerable amount of work that was undertaken by the Discussion Group which largely scoped and informed the Issues Report, I do not see any reason to extend the comment period by an extra 20 days.
It would appear from Steve’s email that if we delay the posting of the Issue Report by 3 days to 3 September, it removes the possibility of the Council considering the Final Report on 19 November.
Thanks
Donna
*Donna Austin**:****Neustar, Inc.** *Policy and Industry Affairs Manager
*Cell:***+1.310.890.9655 *Email: *donna.austin@neustar.biz <mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc>cid:image002.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349>cid:image003.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/neustar>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
*From:*owner-council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Volker Greimann *Sent:* Tuesday, 25 August 2015 1:48 AM *To:* jrobinson@afilias.info <mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> *Subject:* Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Hi Steve,
thank you indeed for the update.
I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period.
Best,
Volker
Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson:
Steve and GNSO Councillors,
It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here:
1.Do we publish 31^st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR
2.Do we publish 3^rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November?
3.Regardless of 31 August or 3^rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary?
Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing.
Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August.
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:*Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] *Sent:* 18 August 2015 23:26 *To:* council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> *Subject:* Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Bret,
Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council’s consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual:
/The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP./
*/The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery./*
Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> *9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting* * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> *12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November ->*2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December* *Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting*
These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines.
Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions.
Best,
Steve
*From: *Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> *Date: *Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM *To: *Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> *Subject: *Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress.
On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work?
Bret
On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> *Close 13 October* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November
Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and _immediately_ putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
*Steven Chan* Sr. Policy Manager
*ICANN *12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410
tel: +1.310.301.5800
fax: +1.310.823.8649
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
Having looked at the PDP manual (http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-16dec11-en.pdf), Section 6, I can confirm the below is accurate. There is no deliberation step required or even forseen for the publication of an issues report. Best regards, Volker Am 25.08.2015 um 19:01 schrieb Volker Greimann:
Hi Phil,
Unless I am mistaken, the publication of an issues report that has already been requested by the Council by ICANN staff is not subject to a deliberation or decision by the Council. While we may deliberate, this would not impact the issues report, therefore it is of no consequence. Only after public comments have been submitted and reviewed the Council has a role to play again in deciding whether to initiate a PDP. If the report is ready, it should be published for public comment.
We can therefore use the allotted time to discuss the published issues report during our meeting but I see no reason whatsoever for delaying the report for our benefit as our deliberations will not impact this in any way forseen by the bylaws.
What we can then debate at our meeting is whether an extention of the standard 40 day public comment period is warranted or even required and I am open for debate on that.
With respect to your question, a month is not in itself problematic, but a month here and a month there quickly adds up to another year or two. So I am very much in favor of streamlining the formal process in favor of having a good PDP effort that may as well take more time than currently expected.
TL;DR: The report should be published; our discussion item will not be affected either way due to our defined role in the PDP process not being affected by publication.
Best regards,
Volker
Am 25.08.2015 um 18:42 schrieb Phil Corwin:
Respectfully disagreeing, it is the position of the BC that the comment period should be initiated immediately following the Council call of September 3^rd , and that the comment period should be for 60 days.
Publication on August 31st will render null and void this item on the proposed Council agenda for September 3:
*_Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION & DECISION – Public Comment Period for New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report (15 minutes)_*
At its July 2015 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the staff request <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17350.html> for an extension of the deadline for publication of the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures. The extension was viewed as necessary given the number of potential topics that had been identified by the New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group and the need to develop a proposed framework for handling those topics in a possible PDP. The Council had also discussed briefly the possible benefits of having an extended public comment period in view of the community interest in this matter. Here the Council will discuss the ramifications of extending the public comment period and decide whether or not to recommend moving forward with the idea.
4.1 – Update and presentation of possible timelines (Steve Chan)
4.2 – Council discussion
4.3 – Council decision and next steps
Publishing for only 40 days will close out the comment period prior to the Dublin ICANN meeting, at which the community can be more fully informed about the Preliminary Issue Report.
Really, with the second round at least several years off, what is the rush when all we are talking about is a one month delay of Council consideration of the Final Report, when that approval can still be accomplished this calendar year?
Thank you for your consideration.
Best to all, Philip
*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*
*Virtualaw LLC*
*1155 F Street, NW*
*Suite 1050*
*Washington, DC 20004*
*202-559-8597/Direct*
*202-559-8750/Fax*
*202-255-6172/cell***
**
*Twitter: @VlawDC*
*/"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*
*From:*owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Austin, Donna *Sent:* Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:25 PM *To:* Volker Greimann; jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link *Subject:* RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
I support Volker’s position.
I would also add, that given the considerable amount of work that was undertaken by the Discussion Group which largely scoped and informed the Issues Report, I do not see any reason to extend the comment period by an extra 20 days.
It would appear from Steve’s email that if we delay the posting of the Issue Report by 3 days to 3 September, it removes the possibility of the Council considering the Final Report on 19 November.
Thanks
Donna
*Donna Austin**:****Neustar, Inc.** *Policy and Industry Affairs Manager
*Cell:***+1.310.890.9655 *Email: *donna.austin@neustar.biz
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc>cid:image002.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349>cid:image003.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/neustar>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
*From:*owner-council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Volker Greimann *Sent:* Tuesday, 25 August 2015 1:48 AM *To:* jrobinson@afilias.info <mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> *Subject:* Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Hi Steve,
thank you indeed for the update.
I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period.
Best,
Volker
Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson:
Steve and GNSO Councillors,
It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here:
1.Do we publish 31^st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR
2.Do we publish 3^rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November?
3.Regardless of 31 August or 3^rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary?
Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing.
Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August.
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:*Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] *Sent:* 18 August 2015 23:26 *To:* council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> *Subject:* Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Bret,
Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council’s consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual:
/The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP./
*/The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery./*
Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> *9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting* * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> *12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November ->*2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December* *Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting*
These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines.
Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions.
Best,
Steve
*From: *Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> *Date: *Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM *To: *Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> *Subject: *Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress.
On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work?
Bret
On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> *Close 13 October* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November
Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and _immediately_ putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
*Steven Chan* Sr. Policy Manager
*ICANN *12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410
tel: +1.310.301.5800
fax: +1.310.823.8649
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email:vgreimann@key-systems.net
Web:www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann - legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email:vgreimann@key-systems.net
Web:www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems
CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
Thanks for the clarification. So the option that Steve originally presented of publishing on 9/3 rather than 8/31 is not in order? Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 1:11 PM To: Phil Corwin; Austin, Donna; jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Having looked at the PDP manual (http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-16dec11-en.pdf), Section 6, I can confirm the below is accurate. There is no deliberation step required or even forseen for the publication of an issues report. Best regards, Volker Am 25.08.2015 um 19:01 schrieb Volker Greimann: Hi Phil, Unless I am mistaken, the publication of an issues report that has already been requested by the Council by ICANN staff is not subject to a deliberation or decision by the Council. While we may deliberate, this would not impact the issues report, therefore it is of no consequence. Only after public comments have been submitted and reviewed the Council has a role to play again in deciding whether to initiate a PDP. If the report is ready, it should be published for public comment. We can therefore use the allotted time to discuss the published issues report during our meeting but I see no reason whatsoever for delaying the report for our benefit as our deliberations will not impact this in any way forseen by the bylaws. What we can then debate at our meeting is whether an extention of the standard 40 day public comment period is warranted or even required and I am open for debate on that. With respect to your question, a month is not in itself problematic, but a month here and a month there quickly adds up to another year or two. So I am very much in favor of streamlining the formal process in favor of having a good PDP effort that may as well take more time than currently expected. TL;DR: The report should be published; our discussion item will not be affected either way due to our defined role in the PDP process not being affected by publication. Best regards, Volker Am 25.08.2015 um 18:42 schrieb Phil Corwin: Respectfully disagreeing, it is the position of the BC that the comment period should be initiated immediately following the Council call of September 3rd, and that the comment period should be for 60 days. Publication on August 31st will render null and void this item on the proposed Council agenda for September 3: Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION & DECISION - Public Comment Period for New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report (15 minutes) At its July 2015 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the staff request<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17350.html> for an extension of the deadline for publication of the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures. The extension was viewed as necessary given the number of potential topics that had been identified by the New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group and the need to develop a proposed framework for handling those topics in a possible PDP. The Council had also discussed briefly the possible benefits of having an extended public comment period in view of the community interest in this matter. Here the Council will discuss the ramifications of extending the public comment period and decide whether or not to recommend moving forward with the idea. 4.1 - Update and presentation of possible timelines (Steve Chan) 4.2 - Council discussion 4.3 - Council decision and next steps Publishing for only 40 days will close out the comment period prior to the Dublin ICANN meeting, at which the community can be more fully informed about the Preliminary Issue Report. Really, with the second round at least several years off, what is the rush when all we are talking about is a one month delay of Council consideration of the Final Report, when that approval can still be accomplished this calendar year? Thank you for your consideration. Best to all, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Austin, Donna Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:25 PM To: Volker Greimann; jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures I support Volker's position. I would also add, that given the considerable amount of work that was undertaken by the Discussion Group which largely scoped and informed the Issues Report, I do not see any reason to extend the comment period by an extra 20 days. It would appear from Steve's email that if we delay the posting of the Issue Report by 3 days to 3 September, it removes the possibility of the Council considering the Final Report on 19 November. Thanks Donna Donna Austin: Neustar, Inc. Policy and Industry Affairs Manager Cell: +1.310.890.9655 Email: donna.austin@neustar.biz<mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz> ________________________________ 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@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann Sent: Tuesday, 25 August 2015 1:48 AM To: jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Hi Steve, thank you indeed for the update. I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period. Best, Volker Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson: Steve and GNSO Councillors, It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here: 1. Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR 2. Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November? 3. Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary? Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing. Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August. Thanks, Jonathan From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26 To: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Bret, Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council's consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual: The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP. The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery. Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines. Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions. Best, Steve From: Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach. Best, Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649 -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15 -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15
If there is a good reason to delay it, such as staff still needing to finalize it, I would not oppose it, however at this time the publication time seems arbitrary, so I favor expediency over delay. If we would be off by a few days for the November meeting, a shorter extention of the comment period might solve that, but only if publication happens sooner rather than later. All things considered, an earlier publication date would be preferential as it leaves us with more options on the tail end. Best, Volker Am 25.08.2015 um 19:23 schrieb Phil Corwin:
Thanks for the clarification.
So the option that Steve originally presented of publishing on 9/3 rather than 8/31 is not in order?
*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*
*Virtualaw LLC*
*1155 F Street, NW*
*Suite 1050*
*Washington, DC 20004*
*202-559-8597/Direct*
*202-559-8750/Fax*
*202-255-6172/cell***
**
*Twitter: @VlawDC*
*/"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*
*From:*Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net] *Sent:* Tuesday, August 25, 2015 1:11 PM *To:* Phil Corwin; Austin, Donna; jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link *Subject:* Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Having looked at the PDP manual (http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-16dec11-en.pdf), Section 6, I can confirm the below is accurate. There is no deliberation step required or even forseen for the publication of an issues report.
Best regards,
Volker
Am 25.08.2015 um 19:01 schrieb Volker Greimann:
Hi Phil,
Unless I am mistaken, the publication of an issues report that has already been requested by the Council by ICANN staff is not subject to a deliberation or decision by the Council. While we may deliberate, this would not impact the issues report, therefore it is of no consequence. Only after public comments have been submitted and reviewed the Council has a role to play again in deciding whether to initiate a PDP. If the report is ready, it should be published for public comment.
We can therefore use the allotted time to discuss the published issues report during our meeting but I see no reason whatsoever for delaying the report for our benefit as our deliberations will not impact this in any way forseen by the bylaws.
What we can then debate at our meeting is whether an extention of the standard 40 day public comment period is warranted or even required and I am open for debate on that.
With respect to your question, a month is not in itself problematic, but a month here and a month there quickly adds up to another year or two. So I am very much in favor of streamlining the formal process in favor of having a good PDP effort that may as well take more time than currently expected.
TL;DR: The report should be published; our discussion item will not be affected either way due to our defined role in the PDP process not being affected by publication.
Best regards,
Volker
Am 25.08.2015 um 18:42 schrieb Phil Corwin:
Respectfully disagreeing, it is the position of the BC that the comment period should be initiated immediately following the Council call of September 3^rd , and that the comment period should be for 60 days.
Publication on August 31st will render null and void this item on the proposed Council agenda for September 3:
*_Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION & DECISION – Public Comment Period for New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report (15 minutes)_*
At its July 2015 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the staff request <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17350.html> for an extension of the deadline for publication of the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures. The extension was viewed as necessary given the number of potential topics that had been identified by the New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group and the need to develop a proposed framework for handling those topics in a possible PDP. The Council had also discussed briefly the possible benefits of having an extended public comment period in view of the community interest in this matter. Here the Council will discuss the ramifications of extending the public comment period and decide whether or not to recommend moving forward with the idea.
4.1 – Update and presentation of possible timelines (Steve Chan)
4.2 – Council discussion
4.3 – Council decision and next steps
Publishing for only 40 days will close out the comment period prior to the Dublin ICANN meeting, at which the community can be more fully informed about the Preliminary Issue Report.
Really, with the second round at least several years off, what is the rush when all we are talking about is a one month delay of Council consideration of the Final Report, when that approval can still be accomplished this calendar year?
Thank you for your consideration.
Best to all, Philip
*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*
*Virtualaw LLC*
*1155 F Street, NW*
*Suite 1050*
*Washington, DC 20004*
*202-559-8597/Direct*
*202-559-8750/Fax*
*202-255-6172/cell*
**
*Twitter: @VlawDC*
*/"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*
*From:*owner-council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Austin, Donna *Sent:* Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:25 PM *To:* Volker Greimann; jrobinson@afilias.info <mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> *Subject:* RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
I support Volker’s position.
I would also add, that given the considerable amount of work that was undertaken by the Discussion Group which largely scoped and informed the Issues Report, I do not see any reason to extend the comment period by an extra 20 days.
It would appear from Steve’s email that if we delay the posting of the Issue Report by 3 days to 3 September, it removes the possibility of the Council considering the Final Report on 19 November.
Thanks
Donna
*Donna Austin**:****Neustar, Inc.** *Policy and Industry Affairs Manager
*Cell:***+1.310.890.9655 *Email: *donna.austin@neustar.biz <mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc>cid:image002.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349>cid:image003.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/neustar>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
*From:*owner-council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Volker Greimann *Sent:* Tuesday, 25 August 2015 1:48 AM *To:* jrobinson@afilias.info <mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> *Subject:* Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Hi Steve,
thank you indeed for the update.
I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period.
Best,
Volker
Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson:
Steve and GNSO Councillors,
It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here:
1.Do we publish 31^st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR
2.Do we publish 3^rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November?
3.Regardless of 31 August or 3^rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary?
Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing.
Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August.
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:*Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] *Sent:* 18 August 2015 23:26 *To:* council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> *Subject:* Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Bret,
Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council’s consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual:
/The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP./
*/The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery./*
Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> *9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting* * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> *12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November ->*2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December* *Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting*
These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines.
Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions.
Best,
Steve
*From: *Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> *Date: *Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM *To: *Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> *Subject: *Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress.
On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work?
Bret
On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> *Close 13 October* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November
Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and _immediately_ putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
*Steven Chan* Sr. Policy Manager
*ICANN *12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410
tel: +1.310.301.5800
fax: +1.310.823.8649
--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net>
Web: www.key-systems.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=>
www.domaindiscount24.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=>
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=>
www.twitter.com/key_systems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=>
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net>
Web: www.key-systems.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=>
www.domaindiscount24.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=>
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=>
www.twitter.com/key_systems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=>
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15
--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email:vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net>
Web:www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> /www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net>
www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> /www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email:vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net>
Web:www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> /www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net>
www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> /www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email:vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web:www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> /www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> /www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email:vgreimann@key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web:www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> /www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> /www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
Dear Councilors, We appreciate the discussion taking place. I just wanted to take a moment to try and simply the discussion if possible. The agenda item for 3 Sept is expected to be in regards to the length of the public comment period and as Volker pointed out, is not in any way to deliberate whether or not to publish. The staff suggestion to delay the publication until 3 Sept, after a decision is expected to be made on the length of the public comment, was merely to avoid confusion from having to potentially modify the public comment close date so shortly after publishing. Unfortunately, this suggestion has caused confusion on the Council list instead, so I would suggest the following approach to keep this as simple as possible: 1. Publish the Preliminary Issue Report on 31 August as planned, with a 40 day public comment period. 2. Discuss the length of the public comment period on the 3 Sept GNSO Council meeting and if the decision is made to provide for longer than 40 days, adjust accordingly. The merits and implications of choosing one length of public comment period over another, such as those raised by Philip, will be discussed on the Council call. Note, if the Council determines that an extended public comment period is warranted, it does not necessarily need to be 60 days and can be shorter or longer as makes sense relative to other circumstances (e.g., ICANN54). I hope this helps. Best, Steve From: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@key-systems.net> Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 10:10 AM To: Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@neustar.biz>, "jrobinson@afilias.info" <jrobinson@afilias.info>, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org>, "bret@uniregistry.link" <bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Having looked at the PDP manual (http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-16dec11-en.pdf), Section 6, I can confirm the below is accurate. There is no deliberation step required or even forseen for the publication of an issues report. Best regards, Volker Am 25.08.2015 um 19:01 schrieb Volker Greimann:
Hi Phil,
Unless I am mistaken, the publication of an issues report that has already been requested by the Council by ICANN staff is not subject to a deliberation or decision by the Council. While we may deliberate, this would not impact the issues report, therefore it is of no consequence. Only after public comments have been submitted and reviewed the Council has a role to play again in deciding whether to initiate a PDP. If the report is ready, it should be published for public comment.
We can therefore use the allotted time to discuss the published issues report during our meeting but I see no reason whatsoever for delaying the report for our benefit as our deliberations will not impact this in any way forseen by the bylaws.
What we can then debate at our meeting is whether an extention of the standard 40 day public comment period is warranted or even required and I am open for debate on that.
With respect to your question, a month is not in itself problematic, but a month here and a month there quickly adds up to another year or two. So I am very much in favor of streamlining the formal process in favor of having a good PDP effort that may as well take more time than currently expected.
TL;DR: The report should be published; our discussion item will not be affected either way due to our defined role in the PDP process not being affected by publication.
Best regards,
Volker
Am 25.08.2015 um 18:42 schrieb Phil Corwin:
Respectfully disagreeing, it is the position of the BC that the comment period should be initiated immediately following the Council call of September 3rd, and that the comment period should be for 60 days.
Publication on August 31st will render null and void this item on the proposed Council agenda for September 3: Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION & DECISION Public Comment Period for New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report (15 minutes) At its July 2015 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the staff request <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17350.html> for an extension of the deadline for publication of the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures. The extension was viewed as necessary given the number of potential topics that had been identified by the New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group and the need to develop a proposed framework for handling those topics in a possible PDP. The Council had also discussed briefly the possible benefits of having an extended public comment period in view of the community interest in this matter. Here the Council will discuss the ramifications of extending the public comment period and decide whether or not to recommend moving forward with the idea. 4.1 Update and presentation of possible timelines (Steve Chan) 4.2 Council discussion 4.3 Council decision and next steps
Publishing for only 40 days will close out the comment period prior to the Dublin ICANN meeting, at which the community can be more fully informed about the Preliminary Issue Report.
Really, with the second round at least several years off, what is the rush when all we are talking about is a one month delay of Council consideration of the Final Report, when that approval can still be accomplished this calendar year?
Thank you for your consideration.
Best to all, Philip
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell
Twitter: @VlawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Austin, Donna Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:25 PM To: Volker Greimann; jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
I support Volker¹s position.
I would also add, that given the considerable amount of work that was undertaken by the Discussion Group which largely scoped and informed the Issues Report, I do not see any reason to extend the comment period by an extra 20 days.
It would appear from Steve¹s email that if we delay the posting of the Issue Report by 3 days to 3 September, it removes the possibility of the Council considering the Final Report on 19 November.
Thanks
Donna
Donna Austin:Neustar, Inc. Policy and Industry Affairs Manager Cell:+1.310.890.9655 Email: <mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz> donna.austin@neustar.biz
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: Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc> LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349> Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/neustar> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
From:owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann Sent: Tuesday, 25 August 2015 1:48 AM To: jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Hi Steve,
thank you indeed for the update.
I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period.
Best,
Volker
Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson:
Steve and GNSO Councillors,
It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here:
1. Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR
2. Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November?
3. Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary?
Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing.
Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August.
Thanks,
Jonathan
From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26 To: council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Bret,
Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council¹s consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual:
The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP.
The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery.
Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines.
Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions.
Best,
Steve
From: Bret Fausett < <mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> bret@uniregistry.link> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress.
On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work?
Bret
On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager
ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410
tel: +1.310.301.5800
fax: +1.310.823.8649
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d= AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w &m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9 MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD- g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_ tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJn CkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com &d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH 87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6R AiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=A wMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w& m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L 10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=>
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySyst ems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL 7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllH fceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsy stems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4 TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEy Z_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=>
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g &c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_t MV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmp TwcYaMJOg&e=>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann - legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d= AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w &m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9 MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD- g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_ tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJn CkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com &d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH 87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6R AiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=A wMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w& m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L 10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=>
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySyst ems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL 7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllH fceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsy stems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4 TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEy Z_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=>
CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g &c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_t MV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmp TwcYaMJOg&e=>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann - legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net
Web: www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
Thanks for the response, Volker. In regard to this: What we can then debate at our meeting is whether an extention of the standard 40 day public comment period is warranted or even required and I am open for debate on that. Okay on that. According to Steve's original email, a 40 day comment period starting 8/31 would close on October 10. If that were extended to 60 days it would close on Saturday, October 24th, two days after the end of the Dublin meeting. Assuming 30 days to prepare the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report would take us to November 23rd, a few days after the November 19 Council call. So there seems to be no way to have the comment period encompass Dublin and have it assured that everything will be ready for our November meeting. By no means are we trying to introduce delay for its own sake. But given the dozens of issues raised in the Report and the fact that this comment overlaps with all that is going on regarding the transition and accountability, it's the BC position that the community would benefit from an airing of the Preliminary Report in Dublin prior to the close of the comment period. It could also help clarify some issues so that the comments are better informed and focused. We can discuss all that on next week's call. Best, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Volker Greimann [mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 1:02 PM To: Phil Corwin; Austin, Donna; jrobinson@afilias.info; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org; bret@uniregistry.link Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Hi Phil, Unless I am mistaken, the publication of an issues report that has already been requested by the Council by ICANN staff is not subject to a deliberation or decision by the Council. While we may deliberate, this would not impact the issues report, therefore it is of no consequence. Only after public comments have been submitted and reviewed the Council has a role to play again in deciding whether to initiate a PDP. If the report is ready, it should be published for public comment. We can therefore use the allotted time to discuss the published issues report during our meeting but I see no reason whatsoever for delaying the report for our benefit as our deliberations will not impact this in any way forseen by the bylaws. What we can then debate at our meeting is whether an extention of the standard 40 day public comment period is warranted or even required and I am open for debate on that. With respect to your question, a month is not in itself problematic, but a month here and a month there quickly adds up to another year or two. So I am very much in favor of streamlining the formal process in favor of having a good PDP effort that may as well take more time than currently expected. TL;DR: The report should be published; our discussion item will not be affected either way due to our defined role in the PDP process not being affected by publication. Best regards, Volker Am 25.08.2015 um 18:42 schrieb Phil Corwin: Respectfully disagreeing, it is the position of the BC that the comment period should be initiated immediately following the Council call of September 3rd, and that the comment period should be for 60 days. Publication on August 31st will render null and void this item on the proposed Council agenda for September 3: Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION & DECISION - Public Comment Period for New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report (15 minutes) At its July 2015 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the staff request<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17350.html> for an extension of the deadline for publication of the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures. The extension was viewed as necessary given the number of potential topics that had been identified by the New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group and the need to develop a proposed framework for handling those topics in a possible PDP. The Council had also discussed briefly the possible benefits of having an extended public comment period in view of the community interest in this matter. Here the Council will discuss the ramifications of extending the public comment period and decide whether or not to recommend moving forward with the idea. 4.1 - Update and presentation of possible timelines (Steve Chan) 4.2 - Council discussion 4.3 - Council decision and next steps Publishing for only 40 days will close out the comment period prior to the Dublin ICANN meeting, at which the community can be more fully informed about the Preliminary Issue Report. Really, with the second round at least several years off, what is the rush when all we are talking about is a one month delay of Council consideration of the Final Report, when that approval can still be accomplished this calendar year? Thank you for your consideration. Best to all, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Austin, Donna Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:25 PM To: Volker Greimann; jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan'; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures I support Volker's position. I would also add, that given the considerable amount of work that was undertaken by the Discussion Group which largely scoped and informed the Issues Report, I do not see any reason to extend the comment period by an extra 20 days. It would appear from Steve's email that if we delay the posting of the Issue Report by 3 days to 3 September, it removes the possibility of the Council considering the Final Report on 19 November. Thanks Donna Donna Austin: Neustar, Inc. Policy and Industry Affairs Manager Cell: +1.310.890.9655 Email: donna.austin@neustar.biz<mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz> ________________________________ 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@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann Sent: Tuesday, 25 August 2015 1:48 AM To: jrobinson@afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; 'Steve Chan' <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Hi Steve, thank you indeed for the update. I see no reason to delay the publication, especially since the delay by a few days will cause us to lose a full month at least. Given that we can expect delays down the road as this will be a piece of substantial work, I would favor publication sooner rather than later, with a standard 40 day comment period. Best, Volker Am 24.08.2015 um 21:38 schrieb Jonathan Robinson: Steve and GNSO Councillors, It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here: 1. Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as per option 1 below OR 2. Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we miss dealing with it on 19 November? 3. Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary? Note: My personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary and that this will not be confusing. Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report by 31 August. Thanks, Jonathan From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26 To: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Bret, Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to the Council's consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing, here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual: The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of a PDP. The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of that 30-day time for delivery. Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first, and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a PDP: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12 November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet, dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these timelines. Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions. Best, Steve From: Bret Fausett <bret@uniregistry.link<mailto:bret@uniregistry.link>> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress. On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between close of comment period and starting the hard policy work? Bret On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach. Best, Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649 -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.key-2Dsystems.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=NFTUH2gHAgMZwtwHVYO24OeBmtc9MP5tLRtIWtIodCs&e=> / www.RRPproxy.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.RRPproxy.net&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=v-JDchL89R2vFwAEy5yOnnkjKoHSEPNJnCkJPDfRchc&e=> www.domaindiscount24.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.domaindiscount24.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=qiVsBjOKfvG70kx9l0jxUeb6RAiNc7PGuymC2MWT2Io&e=> / www.BrandShelter.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.BrandShelter.com&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=PJKsGm0dygKOdPw6ogTLmmsqcgH-L10CJgRJjvwf06A&e=> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.facebook.com_KeySystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=rDVhKmFKZBimibKpU8BllHfceYKH4fhNHSVMOx9nmFc&e=> www.twitter.com/key_systems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_key-5Fsystems&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=T9FB1A4yriMDgABiElEyZ_5g7aIxOQBqbJAlcsn44m8&e=> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.keydrive.lu&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=h_tMV3s1ezNblZVKti4mGdM7TnPW6hk3UlRURrzpDVw&s=GCu1SDFVe0uItA1DjnkAiQ-g67oUN_xOmpTwcYaMJOg&e=> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15 -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15
Hi, Since it is a preliminary issues report, our deliberations and comments might indeed be of consequence in the creation of the final issues report. But does it matter when, or how often, we discuss it? As long as it is before the close of the comment period, that is. Might be reasonable to discuss this in Dublin, though, before the comment period ends.. I am still of the belief that the period around a meeting is not good for terminating a comment period. We all know that the week before, the week of the meeting, and the week after the meeting are really not available for review and comment - a face to face meeting should be a 3 week dead zone that is recognized by lengthening a comment period. It used to be, when did we lose the habit of a moratorium on comment deadlines around the meetings? On as sensitive an issue as a possible next gTLD round, a longer comment period that respects the time spent at the Dublin meeting seems to me to be the right thing to do. While I have not received direct guidance from the NCSG on this issue, I do know there are only so many documents we can comment on at a time and that the period immediately before and after a meeting is a hard time to generate comments. I don't really understand the significance of the issue of the date on which the preliminary issues report is released - that should be based on when the staff is ready to do so and seems independent of how we schedule a comment period around the Dublin meeting. But I guess if we need a council meeting to make a decision on the longer comment period that takes the Dublin meeting into account, I would support waiting until we have had a chance to discuss it. avri On 25-Aug-15 13:01, Volker Greimann wrote:
Hi Phil,
Unless I am mistaken, the publication of an issues report that has already been requested by the Council by ICANN staff is not subject to a deliberation or decision by the Council. While we may deliberate, this would not impact the issues report, therefore it is of no consequence. Only after public comments have been submitted and reviewed the Council has a role to play again in deciding whether to initiate a PDP. If the report is ready, it should be published for public comment.
We can therefore use the allotted time to discuss the published issues report during our meeting but I see no reason whatsoever for delaying the report for our benefit as our deliberations will not impact this in any way forseen by the bylaws.
What we can then debate at our meeting is whether an extention of the standard 40 day public comment period is warranted or even required and I am open for debate on that.
With respect to your question, a month is not in itself problematic, but a month here and a month there quickly adds up to another year or two. So I am very much in favor of streamlining the formal process in favor of having a good PDP effort that may as well take more time than currently expected.
TL;DR: The report should be published; our discussion item will not be affected either way due to our defined role in the PDP process not being affected by publication.
Best regards,
Volker
Am 25.08.2015 um 18:42 schrieb Phil Corwin:
Respectfully disagreeing, it is the position of the BC that the comment period should be initiated immediately following the Council call of September 3^rd , and that the comment period should be for 60 days.
Publication on August 31st will render null and void this item on the proposed Council agenda for September 3:
*_Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION & DECISION – Public Comment Period for New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Preliminary Issue Report (15 minutes)_*
At its July 2015 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the staff request <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17350.html> for an extension of the deadline for publication of the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures. The extension was viewed as necessary given the number of potential topics that had been identified by the New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group and the need to develop a proposed framework for handling those topics in a possible PDP. The Council had also discussed briefly the possible benefits of having an extended public comment period in view of the community interest in this matter. Here the Council will discuss the ramifications of extending the public comment period and decide whether or not to recommend moving forward with the idea.
4.1 – Update and presentation of possible timelines (Steve Chan)
4.2 – Council discussion
4.3 – Council decision and next steps
Publishing for only 40 days will close out the comment period prior to the Dublin ICANN meeting, at which the community can be more fully informed about the Preliminary Issue Report.
Really, with the second round at least several years off, what is the rush when all we are talking about is a one month delay of Council consideration of the Final Report, when that approval can still be accomplished this calendar year?
Thank you for your consideration.
Best to all, Philip
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Steve: I have raised this within the BC and so far all the feedback favors delay of publication to September 3 to allow for Council review, followed by an extended public comment period of greater than 40 days so that it closes post-Dublin. Best regards, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Chan Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 4:27 PM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Dear Councilors, Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal: * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach. Best, Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 fax: +1.310.823.8649
Dear Councillors, this is to let you know that I have brought up the question on today's ALAC call and with 10 ALAC members present (quorum achieved) the Chair conducted a *consensus call* on the topic. Due to the importance of the Topic, the ALAC would prefer a longer Public Comment that would respect the customary blackout periods before, during and after an ICANN meeting. As the topic is of interest to many of ICANN's communities including end users, the ALAC would welcome being able to discuss the topic in Dublin - perhaps as a High Interest Community Topic, as part of the Public Forum or at some point on Constituency Day. The work process is likely to take years - from the ALAC's perspective, it would be imprudent to try to rush it through consultation phases. Warm regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Liaison to the GNSO Council On 18/08/2015 22:26, Steve Chan wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be minimal:
* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that this is a Saturday) * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> *Close 13 October* * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2 November
Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and _immediately_ putting in the request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
Best,
*Steven Chan* Sr. Policy Manager
*ICANN *12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan@icann.org <mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410
tel: +1.310.301.5800
fax: +1.310.823.8649
participants (8)
-
Austin, Donna -
Avri Doria -
Bret Fausett -
Jonathan Robinson -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond -
Phil Corwin -
Steve Chan -
Volker Greimann