From: http://sel.icann.org/node/6738 We've obviously just published the third version of the draft applicant guidebook for new gTLDs. Immediately, one of our commitments, one of our promises becomes relevant, because we have committed that prior to implementing, we will adequately address competition, consumer protection, security, stability and resiliency, malicious abuse processes, sovereignty concerns, and rights protection. These are the issues that have emerged as the result of the introduction discussions. And so we are working through those issues this week, taking further advantage of the huge efforts the IRT -- let me thank that group again -- the huge efforts that the IRT put into proposing a solution for that last issue of rights protection. We will also be discussing the report the board commissioned into investigating the impact of simultaneously adding DNSSEC, new TLDs, and IPv6 to the root. Now, the root scaling work so far has identified that implementing DNSSEC in the root will lead to a sudden increase in the load on the root servers because each DNS inquiry will involve more data returned from the root servers. And so there are now calls emerging from the technical community to implement this change first: Wait for the system to stabilize and then measure the impact before adding many new TLDs to the root. The board is waiting for final input from RSSAC and SSAC on the work that has to be done, but it seems agreed that there is a great deal of room in the system for adaptation, particularly over time, and the issue is not so much to watch for or try and create hard limits on capacity. It's the possibility of too much change too fast. So it's important for us to look for the signs of danger in the system and have procedures in place to do something effective when we detect those signs. And finally, let me mention an innovation in our bottom-up policy development. We are trialing a new format in relation to the vertical integration argument in relation to new gTLDs, so we have two prominent groups of protagonists on opposite sides of this particular debate, and we've agreed on a debate-style format in which each team will make an opening statement and then alternately present on a series of agreed points of difference with a closing statement by each. There will be questions and answers from the floor, and at the end possibly even a straw poll for the audience to indicate who it thinks has put the best case. So I hope to see you there as we trial these new ways of getting to the bottom of policy development processes and making sure that the board gets the best advice about the community reaction. So I hope to see you there at 3:00 in the Crystal A for that one.