Dear Sub Team Members, Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 15 September. These high-level notes are designed to help Work Track Sub Team members navigate through the content of the call. Please also see the recording on the meetings page at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/Work+Track+4+Meetings. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items/Discussion Notes 15 September 1. Working Methods Action Items: 1. Schedule fortnightly meetings for 60 minutes and rotate at 0300, 1500, and 2000 on Thursdays. 2. Sub Team members should review the Work Track 4 wiki at: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=60490781. 3. Use Google Docs for collaboration. 4. When doing a consensus call extend it for two meetings. Discussion Notes: · Fortnightly meeting, but can increase frequency as needed.  Stay with that schedule for now. · Call timing is 60 minutes, rotated at 0300, 1500, 2000 UTC.  Stay with this rotation for now. · Mailing list for the Sub Team, separate from the full WG list. · Wiki for the Sub Team.  Encourage Sub Team members to review the wiki.  Sub Team members can post comments to the wiki. · Collaboration tools: Use Google Docs.  Can also do polls through Doodle. · Consensus calls, use online tools with confirmation on two calls. · How to operate?  Team of only 21.  Conduct all work in the Sub Team as a whole.  Can break into smaller groups. · Look at prioritizing items and decide whether to run in parallel. · Use pen holders/strawperson docs. 2. Work Items/Tasks Action Items: 1. Staff can inquire about the JAS availability, but need to know specifically what we are asking. 2. Cheryl Langdon-Orr proposes creating a table with each of clarifying questions (see Discussion Notes below) to make sure the Sub Group has answered them. Discussion Notes: · Internationalized Domain Names. · Universal Acceptance: Coordinate with the Universal Acceptance Steering Group (UASG). · Security and Stability: Stability review, registry services review.  Consider whether registry services offered might adversely affect security and stability. · Applicant Guidebook: Technical, operational, financial -- Look at whether this information should be required at application time. · Name Collisions: Review findings of Final Report.  Determine whether any changes should be recommended. Check with JAS advisors. · Consider the check list/score cards that were used generally and clarifying questions that were asked.  But clarifying questions were not published, so that was a lack of transparency. · Should we review the applications that failed evaluation and assess whether the threshold used was at the right level?  Or if they didn't fail was the threshold too low? · We can ask for the actual scoring guidelines that the evaluators used and the list of clarifying questions that were asked.  If everyone was asked the same questions, then perhaps the questions need to be updated in the Guidebook   4. Schedule of Work / Grouping of Issues Action Items: 1. The Sub Team will need to draft requests for input from the communities of interest -- SOs and ACs, constituencies, etc. -- on some of these topics.  These requests will be handled through Jeff and Avri.  Staff will start a Google Doc. 2. Staff will reach out to see if there is someone from the UASG group who can join the next call. 3. Cheryl and Rubens will provide questions, which staff will use to inquire about score carding, etc. Discussion Notes: · These items can run in parallel, possibly with a staggered start in the coming weeks. · In parallel, need to reach out to the USAG, inform them of our work and ask if one of them would like to brief us at a future call. · Start Applicant Guidebook work early, possibly in parallel. · Rubens: Some items from the full WG consultation may be relevant and need to be considered. These questions do not need to be asked again in the Sub Group. · Issue of name collisions can be handled later as there are dependencies. Possible sub-group of the Sub Team could take on this work and draft initial documentation. This will be discussed further later.