Dear CPWG,
Thank you for the feedback to our GGP presentation at the just concluded CPWG meeting.
There were some pending issues on the chat; for example, I need to check with our WG about under-represented communities in developed regions. We had an extensive discussion about this - some members felt that we should not open it up too much that it presents loopholes, while others felt that some communities in developing regions deserve support. Several scenarios were presented - would the program support small businesses in under-served regions? How about public entities (e.g., if a ccTLD that is operated by a public entity applies for support)? So it is an evolving discussion, and we are happy to check with the WG and come back to you (Greg, Justine and the CPWG) about this.
For now, the agreement was to use the
UN definition for under-developed, and then use the
GAC and
SubPro definition for under-served. Roberto promised to follow up, so we are happy to discuss this. This is the GAC definition:
An under-served region is defined as one that:
- Does not have a well developed DNS and/or associated industry or economy; and/or
- Has low awareness within its government of ICANN, ICANN’s role and functions and policy processes and the way that these policies affect it.
We have also noted John's suggestion about adjusting the review period to 3 years instead of 2 to investigate if applicants are still in business as registry operators. This is a welcome suggestion.
Finally, kindly take a look at the attached document with revised lifecycle elements, implementation guidance and success metrics, then share any feedback with (preferably before our next GGP meeting on Monday, 08 May). The document is also available on
the Wiki.
Regards,