Dear Sub Team Members, Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 23 February. These high-level notes are designed to help Work Track Sub Team members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant to be a substitute for the recording. Please also see the recording on the meetings page at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/Work+Track+4+Meetings. Note also that the referenced slides for today’s meeting are attached and excerpts from the chat room are included. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items/Discussion Notes 23 February 1. Full Work Update: Next meeting Monday, 27 February at 1500 UTC. 2. CC2 Questions: -- See:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iZBCVEAJPBYEDg7jLsMHKkNczR_b6-jH2Wl5eVH-... -- Discussion of questions. -- Question 4.1 is accepted as written, from this call. 3. Universal Acceptance (See slides): -- UA in a Nutshell (Slide2) -- Key Points (Slide 3) Q&A: Next Round of TLDs: -- Question: In the AGB would be good to use a requirement for UA.  Compliance with best practices. -- Answer: Could be in the AGB.  We are more in the banking, social media, e-commerce, to be UA ready. Could be a good practice, but not a requirement. -- Question: Some people believe that ICANN should be warning people about gTLD issues (UA). -- Answer: We get pretty high acceptance rate for names that are short, and as they get longer they get longer.  Wouldn't say that people should be warned.  We are getting more applications to be ready.  -- When you talk about UA I don't see how it applies to the next round.  -- Not sure how it would apply.  Registries might want to know about it.  This has been an issue since 2001. -- Not just IDNs having IDN problems. -- What can an applicant do?  The contract is subject to the IDN guarantee and the language tables?  A lot is out of applicants' hands.  What can a registry operator do? -- Make sure that non-IDN strings get picked up in Universal Acceptance. -- Leaning more towards a light touch.

From the chat room:

Rubens Kuhl: Currently, AGB states that "Applicants must further demonstrate that they have made reasonable efforts to ensure that the encoded IDN string does not cause any rendering or operational problems. "  But the follow-up example is of a tone higher than UA, mentioning mixed scripts.   But the follow-up example is of a tone higher than UA, mentioning mixed scripts. From registry agreement: "1.2 Technical Feasibility of String.  While ICANN has encouraged and will continue to encourage universal acceptance of all top-level domain strings across the Internet, certain top-level domain strings may encounter difficulty in acceptance by ISPs and webhosters and/or validation by web applications.  Registry Operator shall be responsible for ensuring to its satisfaction the technical feasibility of the TLD string prior to entering into this Agreement." 4. CC2 Questions: -- See:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iZBCVEAJPBYEDg7jLsMHKkNczR_b6-jH2Wl5eVH-... Application Evaluation: (4.3 Https://community.icann.org/x/YT2AAw) -- Technical evaluation: 4.3.1: Is consolidation desirable? -- 4.3.2: Financial evaluation (reading questions)