Dear All, Please find the attendance and recording of the call attached to this email and the AC Chat below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 1 - Overall Process/Support/Outreach Issue held on Tuesday, 04 October 2016 at 03:00 UTC. <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-16may16-en.mp3> The recordings of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt1 Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/7AObAw Thank you. Kind regards, Terri ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 04 October 2016 Terri Agnew: Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 1 - Overall Process/Support/Outreach Issue held on on Tuesday, 04 October 2016 at 03:00 UTC Terri Agnew: wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/-Qm4Aw Michael Flemming: Phil, you weere able to join us! Michael Flemming: Avri said she will be a few minutes late. Terri Agnew: thank you for the update Michael! Phil Buckingham: Lving and working Californian time this week ! Sara Bockey: hmmm Terri Agnew: @Sara, we are unable to hear you, please check your mute Terri Agnew: We can hear you now, thank you Sara. Jeff Neuman: Here were 7 reasons I gave on a previous email: 1. Will lead to lower application fees for registry operators.2. Greater initial choice in back end operators3. Quicker processing of applications if accreditation done in advance4. consistency In evaluation results for registry operator5. Quicker time to delegation as all pdt tests done in advance6. Increases portability of back end registry operators and simplifies Icann processes to change back end operators7. Could lessen costs and time for switching back end providers Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): That ll makes sense to me Jeff avri: there are going to be multiple passes through each topic Michael Flemming: Jeff has his hand up Justine Chew: Steve has also circulated some notes on the RSP certfication brainstorming notes from Amsterdam Sara Bockey: yes, we are slated to dicuss this topic throughout this subteam - we need to discuss addtional topics but that doesnt mean we are done with this topic Rubens Kuhl: I think the answer to the "GDD Summit" part was "no", and that became an ask from contracted parties for future editions. Jeff Neuman: @Rubens: I am not sure there was an answer at the Summit, but there were flip charts that we did with many pros and cons Berry Cobb: Link to notes from GDD summit: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/4.2.8+Accreditation+Programs Rubens Kuhl: "no" as in not having more structured capture of what was said there, not in being pro or con. Jeff Neuman: Thanks Berry....there are some pretty extensive notes Jeff Neuman: Donna - Have you proposed other options? Michael Flemming: More or less, we need to look at the Pros and Cons of the issue. Michael Flemming: I think just going over what was discussed at the GDD Summit would provide for input on that side. Steve Chan 2: Proposals might be good to discuss in between meeting on email? Cecilia Smith: I agree with Michael. We can't rely on what was discussed/captured on who was present at the GDD Summit. Rubens Kuhl: One possible downside that is frequently mentioned is "race to bottom". Berry Cobb: This is also a link to the GDD summit recording for those that may want to listen to that part of the session on this topic. https://www.icann.org/gddsummit Unfortunately, I do not recall which day and time Accredidation was discussed. Sara Bockey: @Steve - agree. i made a note to have those notes recirculated to the group Michael Flemming: @Cecilia, in addition to that, I think the GDD Summit captured a majority of the discussion from Registries, but less applicants opinion. Michael Flemming: applicants as being non-BERO parties Rubens Kuhl: GDD Summit activity on this had a few groups working in parallel so recording might not be that much representative. It was also somewhat more geared towards change of backend for 2012 TLDs, although having a future procedure in context. Michael Flemming: It is a "base" Cecilia Smith: Back@ Michael (in agreement), there are many applicants that did not partiicipant at the GDD for reasons including $$, location and late timing of agenda topics. Michael Flemming: There was only one applicant that actually met the criteria for Applicant Support, correct? Michael Flemming: .Kids Michael Flemming: Cecilia has her hand up as well. Rubens Kuhl: .kids, but it's still in accountability mechanisms disputes and likely going to an auction. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): I thought it was just me finding it hard to hear Christa Steve Chan 2: I believe three applied, one passed - .kids as Michael pointed out. Michael Flemming: .kids, .idn and .ummah Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Gld to see your hnd up Avri mine was about to go up Steve Chan 2: The other two that did not meet the criteria were .IDN and .UMMAH Steve Chan 2: Details regarding the program available here: https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support Berry Cobb: Listed on microsite: https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support Justine Chew: Agree with Michael, + an indication of why the other 2 did not pass, to get an idea of how to help future applicants Steve Chan 2: @Berry, jinx. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): WAY too complicated Christa Taylor: https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support Rubens Kuhl: In trying to prevent gaming, JAS gamed itself to death. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): and poorly advertised or pushed out to the ares one would think could benefit most Berry Cobb: $40K as I recall Christa Taylor: $37k Steve Chan 2: $47k Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): WAY too late Really the whole thing was Too Little effort made Too Late in the program Justine Chew: So, factors were cost, timing of program, complexity of application process or program Rubens Kuhl: .IDN was also blocked due to being a reserved name. Christa Taylor: $47k you have it right Steve Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Yes we do need to go look it all over again Rubens Kuhl: IDN is the 3-letter code for Indonesia Cecilia Smith: So, just so I understand. It cost an applicant $47K to apply for applicant support. Only 3 applied and none were qualified? Sara Bockey: If anyone wants to view the google doc for this WG, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KTHsQSjMSmutsY2WMmQG1DNsNp6cX7k4oQEwKveU... Michael Flemming: So in order to apply for help to applying for a TLD, you have to apply through JAS? This includes not only financial support but also help on the questions for the TLD Application Process? If thats the case, being required to apply for help through a separate process kind of defeats the purpose of asking for help on the TLD Application questions. Michael Flemming: Oxymoronish Michael Flemming: My understanding might not be up to speed so I will take time to go over the background material before offering points of discussion. avri: no, JAS awas the WG that recommended aspects of the program, The Board and Staff designed the Applicant Support Program. avri: one had to go through the SARP, which was a judging panel Steve Chan 2: I do not believe the support extended beyond application either (e.g., running the registry, paying registry fees) avri: there may have been some first year considerations but i do not remember off hand Rubens Kuhl: Board left the door open for considering initial or recurring support, but not commiting to any. avri: https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support Rubens Kuhl: A streamlined distribution network, possibly not requiring registrars, might also work for TLDs targeted at economically-restricted communities. avri: the ASP? not at all for brands. Michael Flemming: Yeah, my apologies. I need to do more background reading before jumping to conclusions. avri: that is a good idea - to get some of JAS support folks into a conversation. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Huge Issue Jeff I agree I din't think it should either avri: i mentioned that undr the rubric of severe penalties for failure. i twas totally based on the fea of gaming. Rubens Kuhl: I believe there were thresholds - One could fail applicant support but not fail evaluation if their points were not so bad. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Well said Avri... It was all rather frustrating re these aspects IMO Justine Chew: Capacity building would require resources. Is there any possibility to reduce complexity? Meet halfway? avri: and certainly before UA, was not all that possible anyway avri: sustanability also has different defintions in the global south avri: i.e lowe salries, lower overjhead cost &c. avri: pardon the typos, please Rubens Kuhl: http://www.dnsec.eg/ is trying to develop such capacities in the middle east, including arabic speaking countries. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Very true Avri Justine Chew: Yes, the support is needed if there is demand, so need to promote program also. Terri Agnew: The call for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 1 - Overall Process/Support/Outreach Issue will take place on Tuesday, 18 October 2016 at 15:00 UTC. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): No OB Jeff Neuman: Thanks all! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Thnks everyone Bye for now Justine Chew: Cheers. Michael Flemming: Thank you! Cecilia Smith: thanks!! avri: good buch of substance discussed today. thanks avri: ... bunch ... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Bye