September 2017 - Gnso-newgtld-wg

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] [Ext] RE: - Draft: Topic Summary Document
by Aikman-Scalese, Anne 26 Sep '17

26 Sep '17

It’s the “copy and paste” aspect - would make it hard for anyone trying to catch up I think when the purpose is to keep members and other apprised of developments – even as to work tracks where they don’t participate. That’s a lot of “copy and paste.” Is there an issue with staff producing pdfs? Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman(a)lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image001.png@01D33619.AFEB6BC0] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/> From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 4:12 PM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Draft: Topic Summary Document Hi Anne, rather than go back and forth on the list, just reaching out to you directly for the moment. Are you having trouble opening those links, say, from a permissions standpoint? I know some folks are unable to open Google Docs at work, but that does not seem to be the case here since you’ve already looked at the “Excel” sheet. But perhaps that’s the issue? Or is it more about usability and not having a live link to click makes it significantly harder to use? Note, the links referenced in the sheet, at least on the Overarching Issues tab, are already elsewhere on the Wiki. Happy to help (to the extent I can). Just trying to figure out what the exact issue is. Thanks, Steve From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com>> Date: Monday, September 25, 2017 at 4:02 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Draft: Topic Summary Document Steve, In that case, it would actually be great if the separate docs were available - at least in pdf form – on the Wiki or as attachments. Thank you, Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman(a)lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image005.png@01D33619.AFC63080] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com[lrrc.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lrrc.com_&d=DwMGaQ&c=Fm…> From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan@icann.org] Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 3:49 PM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Draft: Topic Summary Document Anne, As far I’m aware, there is no easy way to combine a live link with additional text in Google Sheets. If you know otherwise, we’d be happy to receive some tips and update. In the meantime, hopefully you can just copy and paste any links into your browser. All, I forgot to mention that the document is also available on the Wiki here: https://community.icann.org/x/RgV1Aw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…> Best, Steve From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com>> Date: Monday, September 25, 2017 at 3:33 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>, "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Draft: Topic Summary Document Thanks Steve. I do not have live links to the links in the doc once I go to the link you provided. (It may be my system just won’t let me treat these google docs links as live.) Are the links WITHIN the doc supposed to be live? Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman(a)lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> _____________________________ [cid:image006.png@01D33619.AFC63080] Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com[lrrc.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lrrc.com_&d=DwMGaQ&c=Fm…> From: gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Chan Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 3:30 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Draft: Topic Summary Document Dear WG Members, Pursuant to being discussed on the 25 September full WG, the PDP leadership team and staff would like to share a draft topic summary document, available here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1odKmSls0Gs_-SymKjboWq8NqPEVTbMYaPJl…<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spread…>. Within the document, there is a separate tab for each of Overarching Issues, WT1, WT2, WT3, and WT4. The purpose of creating this document was primarily from the realization that given the high number of topics within this WG’s charter, it has become increasingly difficult to keep track of discussions and deliberations for any given topic. This issue is even more pronounced for those that do not follow the work of this WG on a regular basis. As such, this document is intended to benefit those in the community that are interested in the topic but are not engaged with the PDP, folks within the PDP, PDP leadership, and staff alike. This document is envisioned to be a living document that changes to capture additional deliberations (e.g., review of CC2) and eventually anticipated outcomes, preliminary recommendations, etc. Please review when you have an opportunity and provide your feedback about the language in the document, format, or any other suggestions to make this a more useful tool. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> mobile: +1.310.339.4410 office tel: +1.310.301.5800 office fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<applewebdata://310CAD3E-E244-4690-A938-C2655DD44BDE/learn.icann.org/courses…> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO[twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGN…> Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/[facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icann…> http://gnso.icann.org/en/[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_&d=Dw…> ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

2 1

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] [Ext] RE: - Draft: Topic Summary Document
by Steve Chan 25 Sep '17

25 Sep '17

Anne, As far I’m aware, there is no easy way to combine a live link with additional text in Google Sheets. If you know otherwise, we’d be happy to receive some tips and update. In the meantime, hopefully you can just copy and paste any links into your browser. All, I forgot to mention that the document is also available on the Wiki here: https://community.icann.org/x/RgV1Aw Best, Steve From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> Date: Monday, September 25, 2017 at 3:33 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>, "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Draft: Topic Summary Document Thanks Steve. I do not have live links to the links in the doc once I go to the link you provided. (It may be my system just won’t let me treat these google docs links as live.) Are the links WITHIN the doc supposed to be live? Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman(a)lrrc.com _____________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com[lrrc.com] From: gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Chan Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 3:30 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Draft: Topic Summary Document Dear WG Members, Pursuant to being discussed on the 25 September full WG, the PDP leadership team and staff would like to share a draft topic summary document, available here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1odKmSls0Gs_-SymKjboWq8NqPEVTbMYaPJl…. Within the document, there is a separate tab for each of Overarching Issues, WT1, WT2, WT3, and WT4. The purpose of creating this document was primarily from the realization that given the high number of topics within this WG’s charter, it has become increasingly difficult to keep track of discussions and deliberations for any given topic. This issue is even more pronounced for those that do not follow the work of this WG on a regular basis. As such, this document is intended to benefit those in the community that are interested in the topic but are not engaged with the PDP, folks within the PDP, PDP leadership, and staff alike. This document is envisioned to be a living document that changes to capture additional deliberations (e.g., review of CC2) and eventually anticipated outcomes, preliminary recommendations, etc. Please review when you have an opportunity and provide your feedback about the language in the document, format, or any other suggestions to make this a more useful tool. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org mobile: +1.310.339.4410 office tel: +1.310.301.5800 office fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO[twitter.com] Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/[facebook.com] http://gnso.icann.org/en/[gnso.icann.org] This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

3 2

Recordings, attendance & AC Chat from New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call on Monday, 25 September 2017 at 20:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew 25 Sep '17

25 Sep '17

Dear All, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the AC Recording, MP3 recording, and AC Chat below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Monday, 25 September 2017 at 20:00 UTC. Attendance of the calls is also posted on the agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/7BkhB MP3: <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-25sep17-en.mp3> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-25sep17-en.mp3 AC Recording: <https://participate.icann.org/p83di3i4v19/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=96c8662b94871fcc f55d58833d3c9ea8813255262baec5df38f242b37e427b7b> https://participate.icann.org/p83di3i4v19/ The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/ Thank you. Kind regards, Julie ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 25 September 2017 Julie Bisland:Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG call on Monday, 25 September 2017 at 20:00 UTC Julie Bisland:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_7 BkhB <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_ 7BkhB&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosR vTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=IPTxjhmnwzYaEAUfBu4GcDI6VWYmcij5CAAl04Q5mgE &s=B9fknXnsGB3lsA8fkYqGwTzogJdxzEUEt4Edac_GOUo&e> &d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd8 4AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=IPTxjhmnwzYaEAUfBu4GcDI6VWYmcij5CAAl04Q5mgE&s=B9 fknXnsGB3lsA8fkYqGwTzogJdxzEUEt4Edac_GOUo&e= kavouss arasteh:HI JULI Julie Bisland:Hello Kavouss! kavouss arasteh:Here is about mid night Krishna Seeburn - Kris:hi all Julie Bisland:Hello Kris! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hello All Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):do we have adobe audio? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hi Jeff, audio positive Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):do we wait for 3 minutes more? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):test my AC audio now? Jeff Neuman:Can hear you well Cheryl! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I always prefer to have dial up phne, for audio stabiility but still no phine lines connected to the house, :-( new cables to be laid underground it seems ... SIGH Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):and I am *not* going to the off9ce to take calls een at this hour :-) Heather Forrest:@Cheryl - did those 100km winds last week get you? It was rough down here in Tasie. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):It didn't hlep Heather but I lost phines the windy week before Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): ergh typos sorry Heather Forrest:No good - hopefully underground lines will help Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):the office and labortory BLD is just fine now and has been for the week just our residence still offline Julie Bisland:Kavouss: i've sent you a private chat Vanda Scartezini:hi everyone....with a lan connection hope it will work Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Yup that's the *expenive* plan Heather Vanda Scartezini:it is good Avri kavouss arasteh:Pls advise the operator to dial me up kavouss arasteh:Here is mid night and if there would no call then I have to quit kavouss arasteh:I need to be connected Julie Bisland:Kavouss, the operator is trying to call but having trouble kavouss arasteh:what trouble Karen Day:lost avri audio? Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):losing audio - Avri too soft Erica Varlese:audio got very quiet Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):aodio dropped volume Vanda Scartezini:she istill here but became very low kavouss arasteh:00971 2656 0000 ROOM 1505 Ken Stubbs - Afilias:volume back to normal Jonathan Robinson:I updated my SOI recently. More a tidy up and removing of no longer relevant information. Vanda Scartezini:have my full support Greg Shatan:Huis Clos for CLO. Greg Shatan:Translation: No exit for CLO. Full support. Martin Sutton:Fully support Cheryl. kavouss arasteh:De ar Julie kavouss arasteh:Pls advise the operator to dial me up Vanda Scartezini:I have been working with Cheryl since 2007 and she is all for process and quality Rubens Kuhl:Full support for Cheryl, from someone already in the trenches with her for last 18 months! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Thank you for the support on the list I appreciate that and also for the support shown here to step up in support of Avri and Jeff (hopefully the GNSO will not object) Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):We are all happy Cheryl agreed to assume this responsiblity. Jamie Baxter | dotgay:support for Cheryl Phil Buckingham:My congratulations too . Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):congrats! Julie Bisland:Kavouss, the operator is getting error messages, so i'm working with her to troubleshoot. still trying. Alexander Schubert:Congrats! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO)::-) you have to train me now Avri Jeff Neuman:ok...Cheryl you take the meeting from here :) Just kidding Jamie Baxter | dotgay:Congrats Cheryl! kavouss arasteh:tks Alan Greenberg:Chery, having worked with you for several years, trainable?? Heather Forrest:Council's October document deadline is next Monday 2nd - please could the PDP leadership/Paul as liaison put this on the Council agenda? Jeff Neuman:@Heather - I will officially do that after this call Julie Bisland:Kavouss, you're connected now, correct? Heather Forrest:Great, Jeff, thanks. Just making sure it gets on the agenda otherwise we'll have to wait until AD kavouss arasteh:yes thanks Sara Bockey:Apologies for delay in joining - computer issues. Jim Prendergast:Michael - can you referesh my memory on who is invited ot the WT2 call? thanks Vanda Scartezini:please speak lauder Phil Buckingham: WT2 15.00 UTC 28 September - please note the change of time this week only . @ Jim , Kathy Kleiman and Michele Neylon will be joining the call Michael Flemming:Sorry Jim, aside from our normal roster I have confirmed planned attendance from Kathy Kleiman and Michele Neylon kavouss arasteh:Avri, you are heard with distortion Rubens Kuhl:28 September New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team - Track 4 - IDNs/Technical & Operations 20:00 UTC Jonathan Robinson:Your line is fine now Jeff. Seemingly OK once Avri mic is off. Jim Prendergast:thx Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Jeff - Can you share the three GNSO nominees? Greg Shatan:Is the WT5 nomination period still open? Jeff Neuman:thanks Julie Bisland:@Kavouss: your line was creating that echo from Jeff's line so the operator muted it. If I see your hand raised, we will unmute. Rubens Kuhl:Yes we do. Jeff Neuman:@Greg - WE have not really closed the nomination period yet since there were no real candidates from the GNSO that came forward until this week. Greg Shatan:Thanks, Jeff. There may be at least one more "candidate". It might make sense to put a deadline on it at this point. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):QUESTION: @Jeff - Who are the nomiinees from GNSO? QUESTION Jonathan Robinson:@Avri. I think you are fine. Only when you and Jeff are both open mic is there a problem. Jonathan Robinson:Simultaneously Julie Bisland:@Avri: your line is clear, thinking Kavouss's line might have had an issue too, as when a few of you have open lines at the same time they are creating a feedback and echo. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):That's how I am hearing it as well Rubens Kuhl:While the co-chairs have latitude in choosing their method, the one adopted by the Council in the SSC(Standing Selection Committee) is to only publish the chosen name. Donna Austin, Neustar:did we lose audio or is it just me? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Audio fine Rubens Kuhl:Donna, audio works for me in the audio bridge. Donna Austin, Neustar:ok dialling in Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):There will be only 1 Kavous like all the other ACSOs kavouss arasteh:Tks for clarification Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):COMMENT- Avri just said we would know the names of the nominees. That way members of this group can provide input to Leadership on the choice. COMMENT Rubens Kuhl:I don't think we divide WG members between SOs and ACs, since there is no requirement to be from a SO or AC to joing a GNSO PDP WG. Karen Day:I thik Greg is reccomending that only GNSO members of this group select Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Seems a good point to me there @Rubens Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):GNSO Council? Rubens Kuhl:Maxim, the GNSO Council punted this choice to the WG leadership. Greg Shatan:Not GNSO Council. They don't get involved in picking Subgroup leadership. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):The Council suggested the LT to do that as Rubens stated Heather Forrest:Given that the WT5 leaders each represent an SO/AC, then I think the GNSO should be deciding its leader. The GNSO did not have input into the other SO/AC leader nominations. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):He types faster than I do it seems ;-) Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):Dropping for another (hopefully short) meeting. Back soon. Heather Forrest:No problem, Jeff! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Greg, representation needs to be somewhat equal ... for GAC level it is going to be GNSO Council Greg Shatan:Maxim, it's not Council's job. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):I thought GNSO said they will not agree to decide the chair of WT5. Greg Shatan:Anne -- Council said that. Not the GNSO. Not the same thing, Heather Forrest:@Jeff- that's my understanding too, but Council didn't delve into the specifics Greg Shatan:I have to step away. Sorry. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Thank you Jeff! kavouss arasteh:Perhaps GNSO need a PDP for this topic Vaibhav Aggarwsl:+1 Greg & +1 Heather avri doria:certainly Steve Chan:The link to the document being displayed is here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spreads heets_d_1mA-5FhTUhLhJSsfcmoQwREtUqxykZ5KfJffzJAAhEvNlA_edit-3Fusp-3Dsharing <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spread sheets_d_1mA-5FhTUhLhJSsfcmoQwREtUqxykZ5KfJffzJAAhEvNlA_edit-3Fusp-3Dsharing &d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd8 4AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=IPTxjhmnwzYaEAUfBu4GcDI6VWYmcij5CAAl04Q5mgE&s=dQ T9pynxIiSXBGCqN80Rhh021GjQH4shxv-5ut7Oyw0&e> &d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd8 4AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=IPTxjhmnwzYaEAUfBu4GcDI6VWYmcij5CAAl04Q5mgE&s=dQ T9pynxIiSXBGCqN80Rhh021GjQH4shxv-5ut7Oyw0&e= Greg Shatan:I think Council gave Leadership the leeway to deal with this as it sees fit.... Steve Chan:Tab 2, Attributes Matrix Heather Forrest:In 2007 there was a hearty discussion about the benefits and burdens of proliferation of specific categories kavouss arasteh:We need to have justifixations to add new gategory Heather Forrest:Just wndering if any of those benefits/burdens have changed Vanda Scartezini:guess heather this is good idea to get back that debate kavouss arasteh:We need to avoid racing between interested people to jumped into the race to add their name to new categories Steve Chan:we'll work on that Steve Chan:It's the right tab, just an older version... Donna Austin, Neustar:I don't see any reason to do so. Heather Forrest:@Jeff: would that lead to clear efficiencies in IE/delegation? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):not for profit is just the form Rubens Kuhl:There are not-for-profit and there are charitable organizations... could we be mixing the two concepts ? Vanda Scartezini:teh community did not work last time. even catching all the documentation entered into regular auction... Phil Buckingham:I agree Ken we need to differentiate - so we then would have different financial evaluation questions perhaps Susan Payne:agree, some not for profits are very wealthy. ICANN for example Vanda Scartezini:I also agree with NGO group. Donna Austin, Neustar:good point Susan Vanda Scartezini:there will be difficult to deffend only being NGO Alan. agree Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Agree with Alan we cannot limit Applicant Support to non-profit organizations. Alexander Schubert:The keyword might be "public benefit"! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):do we intend to make special categories for LTD or private companies? Hadia Elminiawi:+1 Alan cannot limit support to not for profit organizations Heather Forrest:Seems to me that the answer to whether to create new categories depends on what hyou are using the categorisation for.... Vanda Scartezini:MAxim, I beleive we shall restrict the number of categories Jeff Neuman:@Heather - There is definately a chicken / egg problem kavouss arasteh: If we take that path we may end up with numerous additional categories which could complicate the process Martin Sutton:@Jeff. Agree, I think the non-profit element is a sub component of the applicant, rather than a categorisation of the registry. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Vanda, that was what I meant... we do not need to do so Vanda Scartezini:ok then, Maxim, support this Krishna Seeburn - Kris:@alan...very true its a fact.... kavouss arasteh:Before we create new category we need to have criteria to be meet in order that a given entity become a new category Hadia Elminiawi:ok quite clear Alan kavouss arasteh:to be met Heather Forrest:Specific question: What will categories be used for?? Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):I'm back. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):There is clearly still a lot to discuss in this exercise, but it is a good one to pursue IMO Gg Levine (NABP):Would an applicant have to be identified as a member of a designated category to be considered eligible for financial support? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):financial support was almost useless Krishna Seeburn - Kris:If its sound NGO then the Public internet registry may have to be and may be under the PIR... .NGO / .ORG are under PIR Phil Buckingham:exactly Jeff - we then develop a tree diagram based on Specifications that would be applicable or exempt Gg Levine (NABP):Thx. Rubens Kuhl:Financial evaluation and contracting are also likely impacted by TLD types. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):.moscow TLD would be non for profit too Vanda Scartezini:yes shall go ahead with this exercise. Rubens Kuhl:And contract could be the only impact, like it was in 2012 for governmental organisations. Christa Taylor:I would see financial support being separate as mentioned, there are very wealthy NFPs Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):audio Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):back Martin Sutton:@Heather. dotBrands could have benefited from categorisation in 2012 round, instead, there was a lot of pain during the post-application phase, but eventually recognised as a distinct model through spec 13. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):It's not about being a non-profit. It's about needing Applicant Support. Vanda Scartezini:I beleive so Rubens, and may be what alla re looking at when trying to define categories Christa Taylor:+1 Anne Heather Forrest:@Martin - it makes sense where a categor is created in order to serve a clear purpose. For brands, clearly the purpose was efficiency in evluation and contracting. That I can see clearly. I think we need clear reasons/purpose like that for any other categories as well Donna Austin, Neustar:The criteria for applicant support should be needs based and not tied to specific organisations. Martin Sutton:@Heather - agree Phil Buckingham:+1 Donna Donna Austin, Neustar:Agree Heather Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Is there a case for "case by case" in the matter of appropriate for Applicant Support program? Rubens Kuhl:It's on the list for now, last line of page 1. kavouss arasteh: We should avoid creating new categories under which some of the existing categories covered Vanda Scartezini:totally agree with Anne Rubens Kuhl:Some Geo TLDs are government entities (like .nyc or .rio) and some are not (like .berlin). Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):+1 Rubens Donna Austin, Neustar:Regardless of category, all applications will likely undergo the same baseline process. Donna Austin, Neustar:.nyc is not a geoTLD as defined in the AGB Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):The reason we need a separate category is because this effort failed in the 2012 round. Donna Austin, Neustar:I was responding to a comment by Rubens Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):We need to develop policies to help those who need Applicant Support to succeed. That is why the category should be separate. Rubens Kuhl:Donna, .nyc is a GeoTLD according to both ICANN and NYC Mayor's Office: Rubens Kuhl:https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/ier/f3T5ufeSpeThAJezaxez uDtE/ie-1-1715-21938-en.pdf Rubens Kuhl:"Geographic Names Geographic Name - PassThe Geographic Names Panel has determined that yourapplication falls within the criteria fora geographic name contained inthe Applicant Guidebook Section 2.2.1.4, and the documentation of support or non-objection provided has met all relevant criteriain Section 2.2.1.4.3 of the Applicant Guidebook" Donna Austin, Neustar:@Rubens, I get that, but it is not a geo in terms of the AGB. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):like poor oil industry communty brand Rubens Kuhl:Donna, tell that to ICANN and to the .nyc operator ... ;-) Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):Hi! I think this conversation started while I had dropped for another meeting. Can someone fill me in as to why we're discussing categories? Whether to have them? What that determination drives? Thanks! Jamie Baxter | dotgay:in the 2012 round weren't applicants allowed to pick both geo and community? Krishna Seeburn - Kris:agreed things may have to be clear at the application time and meeting the needed requirements Rubens Kuhl:@Jamie, that's true, and there some examples. OSAKA and one or two of the Barcelona TLDs. Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):OK, thanks. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):We should perhaps consider different specifications for Applicant Support applicants - e.g. okay to have a fewer number of registrars - make their operations simpler. We need to develop policies to encourage the success of those needing Applicant Support in the public interest. Rubens Kuhl:.OSAKA was decided between two applicants on a Community Priority Evaluation, there were two applications with non-objection from the government. One was community and one was not. avri doria:but Geo was an emergent 'category' while community was a defined category. perhaps that is the reason for overlap. avri doria:but perhaps geo and community are not both categories but one of them is an attribute that can be applied to multiple categories. kavouss arasteh: Yes ,highly regulated is totally different than sensitive category kavouss arasteh:different from Rubens Kuhl:Avri, we could define categories as mutually exclusive and attributes as non-exclusive to move the discussions along. Donna Austin, Neustar:@Avri, geo was a category because of additional requirements. community was a category because of different requirements. avri doria:so was geo a category or an attribute. Donna Austin, Neustar:good question Avir Donna Austin, Neustar:Avri Donna Austin, Neustar:but perhaps we're just splitting hairs for no real purpose Vanda Scartezini:the requirement regarding government authorization makes it a different category imo Donna Austin, Neustar:on the chat discussion Rubens Kuhl:Brand + Exclusive - Use : Category. Attribute of that category: Brand TLD> avri doria:time check 20 minutes left. Rubens Kuhl:Geographic, Community, Governmental: Attributes. Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):Depends on what we're using the categories for. If the "validated registry" category is strictly interpreted (e.g., extensive restrictions) and we don't have an open restricted TLD category, we could be stifling innovation. kavouss arasteh:different from was typed to replace different than in my comment about hihghly regulated and sensitive pls kindly make that correction Jamie Baxter | dotgay:i actually thought there were only standard and community TLDs as options in the 2012 round, however geo was a box that required checking when completing an application and as Donna pointed out, it required additional requirements Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):Would it be because of contractual restrictions (e.g., with ICANN)? avri doria:Jamie, that is somewhat what i mean by the difference between categories and attributes that can be applied to any category. Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):To be clear, I as speculating on answer to Jeff's question as to why we had the governmental organization applicants entry on the chart. Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):was speculating. sheesh. need more coffee. Jeff Neuman:I need coffee too ;) Donna Austin, Neustar:i think we should focus on a rationale for a category and i don't think organisation types require their own category Jeff Neuman:@Donna that may be so, but this exercise will help us Donna Austin, Neustar:yep, its already helped me Jeff and I've drawn my conclusion :-) Greg Shatan:Kristina, you're in the right city for more coffee. Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):@Greg. True. Have already dusted off the sun machine for the winter. Heather Forrest:"sun machine" - now that's fabulous Greg Shatan:@Kristina, your employer needs to buy the sun and move it to Seattle. No more need for a sun machine, then. Donna Austin, Neustar:if an organisation like Nike wanted to sell domain names to anyone, they would not be a brand TLD, is that correct? Rubens Kuhl:Donna, they could sell to brand licensees. Greg Shatan:But not to just "anyone." Donna Austin, Neustar:but does that change whether they are considered a brand TLD Hadia Elminiawi:@greg like that - buy some sun .. Rubens Kuhl:So that could be very ample, like anyone who bought one of their shoes. ;-) Heather Forrest:Excellent initiative, Steve & team! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Thanks Steve Donna Austin, Neustar:sounds good Steve Steve Chan:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1A5uaxBAgmg7QsFuqMdVvt1HxNZ4jKXn m3Hp0gZra7U0/edit?usp=sharing Phil Buckingham:excellent steve Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Bye everyone Heather Forrest:Thanks Avri, Jeff and WT leaders Christa Taylor:Thank-you Hadia Elminiawi:Thank you all and bye Rubens Kuhl:Bye all! Katrin Ohlmer, DOTZON:Thanks & bye, everybody! Greg Shatan:Bye all! Alexander Schubert:Bye! Bruna Santos:thanks evertone, bye! Vanda Scartezini:thansk everyone..

1 0

- Draft: Topic Summary Document
by Steve Chan 25 Sep '17

25 Sep '17

Dear WG Members, Pursuant to being discussed on the 25 September full WG, the PDP leadership team and staff would like to share a draft topic summary document, available here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1odKmSls0Gs_-SymKjboWq8NqPEVTbMYaPJl…. Within the document, there is a separate tab for each of Overarching Issues, WT1, WT2, WT3, and WT4. The purpose of creating this document was primarily from the realization that given the high number of topics within this WG’s charter, it has become increasingly difficult to keep track of discussions and deliberations for any given topic. This issue is even more pronounced for those that do not follow the work of this WG on a regular basis. As such, this document is intended to benefit those in the community that are interested in the topic but are not engaged with the PDP, folks within the PDP, PDP leadership, and staff alike. This document is envisioned to be a living document that changes to capture additional deliberations (e.g., review of CC2) and eventually anticipated outcomes, preliminary recommendations, etc. Please review when you have an opportunity and provide your feedback about the language in the document, format, or any other suggestions to make this a more useful tool. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org mobile: +1.310.339.4410 office tel: +1.310.301.5800 office fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ http://gnso.icann.org/en/

2 1

Actions/Discussion Notes: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG 25 September
by Julie Hedlund 25 Sep '17

25 Sep '17

Dear WG Members, Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 25 September. These high-level notes are designed to help PDP WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat room notes will be provided separately. See the referenced documents: Drafting Team Discussion – Different TLD Types (Wiki Page: https://community.icann.org/x/YKLRAw and Working Document:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mA_hTUhLhJSsfcmoQwREtUqxyk…) Community Comment 1 is available here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=59645660 Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions/Discussion Notes 1. Co-Chair Update: -- One nomination for Cheryl Langdon-Orr. The call for volunteers has ended. If there are no objections that WG will add Cheryl as a third Co-Chair for approval by the GNSO Council on the consent agenda. In about 6 weeks when Avri steps down there will be two Co-Chairs. -- Consensus to name Cheryl as the third Co-Chair pending approval by the GNSO Council. 2. Work Track Updates: Work Track 1: Christa Taylor -- Next meeting, continue conversation from 19 September meeting on the Registry Service Provider Accreditation Program. Work Track 2: Michael Flemming -- Continuing discussion on closed generics. Invited individuals -- Kathy Kleiman and Michele Neylon -- to take part in the discussion. Endeavor to finalize it. 1500 UTC on 28 September. Work Track 3: Karen Day -- Meeting on 26 September at 1500 UTC on string similiarity. Proposal from a group of registries for dealing with the problems that arose in the previous round. Work Track 4: Rubens Kuhl -- Last call discussed financial evaluation. At the meeting on Thursday, 28 September at 2000 UTC we will discuss name collisions and registry services. Work Track 5: Jeff Neuman -- Have a nominee from the ccNSO. Waiting for nominations from the GAC and the ALAC. Received three nominations for the GNSO. -- Concerning the three GNSO candidates for one slot, we need to check to see if they are okay with having their names released. Then the names would be listed and the Leadership would go through the selection process and make a recommendation for the full WG to see if there are any objections. -- ALAC completed a consensus call on selecting a leader and will notify the PDP WG after the candidates have been notified. Will likely have some terms and conditions. -- GAC assured that they were working on it. >From the chat: Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): QUESTION: @Jeff - Who are the nomiinees from GNSO? QUESTION Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): COMMENT- Avri just said we would know the names of the nominees. That way members of this group can provide input to Leadership on the choice. COMMENT Rubens Kuhl: I don't think we divide WG members between SOs and ACs, since there is no requirement to be from a SO or AC to joing a GNSO PDP WG. Karen Day: I thik Greg is reccomending that only GNSO members of this group select Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Seems a good point to me there @Rubens Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): GNSO Council? Rubens Kuhl: Maxim, the GNSO Council punted this choice to the WG leadership. Greg Shatan: Not GNSO Council. They don't get involved in picking Subgroup leadership. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): The Council suggested the LT to do that as Rubens stated Heather Forrest: Given that the WT5 leaders each represent an SO/AC, then I think the GNSO should be deciding its leader. The GNSO did not have input into the other SO/AC leader nominations. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): He types faster than I do it seems ;-) Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry): Dropping for another (hopefully short) meeting. Back soon. Heather Forrest: No problem, Jeff! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): @Greg, representation needs to be somewhat equal ... for GAC level it is going to be GNSO Council Greg Shatan: Maxim, it's not Council's job. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): I thought GNSO said they will not agree to decide the chair of WT5. 3. Drafting Team Discussion continued – Different TLD Types: (Wiki Page: https://community.icann.org/x/YKLRAw and Working Document:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mA_hTUhLhJSsfcmoQwREtUqxyk…) -- Where we ended: We discussed a number of different categories that existed in the 2012 round and then some new ones that came up after the AGB came out and some that in theory could be categories. -- At this point we are just identifying potential categories, then define attributes of these categories. -- Once we define attributes then the work kicks out to the Work Track to see how those categories fit into the work they are doing. -- Example, if Brand should be a category once we agree we kick it out to the specific work tracks that discussion the applications, such as Work Track for in the case of Brand. -- We started discussing whether we should create a category for applicant support and added it to tab 5. -- Clearly differentiate what we are trying to identify in that category. Not-for-Profit: -- Not sure if not-for-profit synonymous with being in the public interest -- it may be a criteria for funding. -- Creating a separate category for not-for-profit didn't make sense. Might be used as a criteria, which is a different question. -- Trying to create a model -- if there is a category can we define it. If we define it what would be the significance. -- Once we have these categories, do we treat them differently? -- The issue we face for policy is that the applicant support program was not that successful in the 2012 round. Are there policy issues that need to be more fully considered? We should go through the exercise, but we don't know the outcome yet. -- Applications can fall into more than one category. -- If you have an application that falls under more then one category then we assume we would do what we did in the 2012 round and ask the applicant to pick. Action: Take out Not-for-Profit as a category but take note if we want to put it back in. >From the chat: Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): not for profit is just the form Rubens Kuhl: There are not-for-profit and there are charitable organizations... could we be mixing the two concepts ? Vanda Scartezini: teh community did not work last time. even catching all the documentation entered into regular auction... Phil Buckingham: I agree Ken we need to differentiate - so we then would have different financial evaluation questions perhaps Susan Payne: agree, some not for profits are very wealthy. ICANN for example Vanda Scartezini: I also agree with NGO group. Donna Austin, Neustar: good point Susan Vanda Scartezini: there will be difficult to deffend only being NGO Alan. agree Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): Agree with Alan we cannot limit Applicant Support to non-profit organizations. Alexander Schubert: The keyword might be "public benefit"! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): do we intend to make special categories for LTD or private companies? Alexander Schubert: The keyword might be "public benefit"! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): do we intend to make special categories for LTD or private companies? Hadia Elminiawi: +1 Alan cannot limit support to not for profit organizations Heather Forrest: Seems to me that the answer to whether to create new categories depends on what hyou are using the categorisation for.... Vanda Scartezini: MAxim, I beleive we shall restrict the number of categories Jeff Neuman: @Heather - There is definately a chicken / egg problem kavouss arasteh: If we take that path we may end up with numerous additional categories which could complicate the process Martin Sutton: @Jeff. Agree, I think the non-profit element is a sub component of the applicant, rather than a categorisation of the registry. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): @Vanda, that was what I meant... we do not need to do so Vanda Scartezini: ok then, Maxim, support this Heather Forrest: Specific question: What will categories be used for?? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): There is clearly still a lot to discuss in this exercise, but it is a good one to pursue IMO Gg Levine (NABP): Would an applicant have to be identified as a member of a designated category to be considered eligible for financial support? Martin Sutton: @Heather. dotBrands could have benefited from categorisation in 2012 round, instead, there was a lot of pain during the post-application phase, but eventually recognised as a distinct model through spec 13. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): It's not about being a non-profit. It's about needing Applicant Support. Vanda Scartezini: I beleive so Rubens, and may be what alla re looking at when trying to define categories Christa Taylor: +1 Anne Heather Forrest: @Martin - it makes sense where a categor is created in order to serve a clear purpose. For brands, clearly the purpose was efficiency in evluation and contracting. That I can see clearly. I think we need clear reasons/purpose like that for any other categories as well Donna Austin, Neustar: The criteria for applicant support should be needs based and not tied to specific organisations. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Is there a case for "case by case" in the matter of appropriate for Applicant Support program? Rubens Kuhl: It's on the list for now, last line of page 1. kavouss arasteh: We should avoid creating new categories under which some of the existing categories covered Highly Regulated and Sensitive TLDs: -- Discussed on the last call, and thought the two needed to be separate. -- Separate them into two categories for this exercise. >From the chat: Rubens Kuhl: Some Geo TLDs are government entities (like .nyc or .rio) and some are not (like .berlin). Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): +1 Rubens Donna Austin, Neustar: Regardless of category, all applications will likely undergo the same baseline process. Donna Austin, Neustar: .nyc is not a geoTLD as defined in the AGB Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): The reason we need a separate category is because this effort failed in the 2012 round. Donna Austin, Neustar: I was responding to a comment by Rubens Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): We need to develop policies to help those who need Applicant Support to succeed. That is why the category should be separate. Rubens Kuhl: Donna, .nyc is a GeoTLD according to both ICANN and NYC Mayor's Office: Rubens Kuhl: https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/ier/f3T5ufeSpeThAJezaxezuDtE… Rubens Kuhl: "Geographic Names Geographic Name - PassThe Geographic Names Panel has determined that yourapplication falls within the criteria fora geographic name contained inthe Applicant Guidebook Highly Regulated and Sensitive TLDs: -- Discussed on the last call, and thought the two needed to be separate. -- Separate them into two categories for this exercise. >From the chat: Rubens Kuhl: Some Geo TLDs are government entities (like .nyc or .rio) and some are not (like .berlin). Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): +1 Rubens Donna Austin, Neustar: Regardless of category, all applications will likely undergo the same baseline process. Donna Austin, Neustar: .nyc is not a geoTLD as defined in the AGB Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): The reason we need a separate category is because this effort failed in the 2012 round. Donna Austin, Neustar: I was responding to a comment by Rubens Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): We need to develop policies to help those who need Applicant Support to succeed. That is why the category should be separate. Rubens Kuhl: Donna, .nyc is a GeoTLD according to both ICANN and NYC Mayor's Office: Rubens Kuhl: https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/ier/f3T5ufeSpeThAJezaxezuDtE… Rubens Kuhl: "Geographic Names Geographic Name - PassThe Geographic Names Panel has determined that yourapplication falls within the criteria fora geographic name contained inthe Applicant Guidebook Section 2.2.1.4, and the documentation of support or non-objection provided has met all relevant criteriain Section 2.2.1.4.3 of the Applicant Guidebook" Donna Austin, Neustar: @Rubens, I get that, but it is not a geo in terms of the AGB. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): like poor oil industry communty brand Rubens Kuhl: Donna, tell that to ICANN and to the .nyc operator ... ;-) Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry): Hi! I think this conversation started while I had dropped for another meeting. Can someone fill me in as to why we're discussing categories? Whether to have them? What that determination drives? Thanks! Jamie Baxter | dotgay: in the 2012 round weren't applicants allowed to pick both geo and community? Krishna Seeburn - Kris: agreed things may have to be clear at the application time and meeting the needed requirements Rubens Kuhl: @Jamie, that's true, and there some examples. OSAKA and one or two of the Barcelona TLDs. Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry): OK, thanks. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC): We should perhaps consider different specifications for Applicant Support applicants - e.g. okay to have a fewer number of registrars - make their operations simpler. We need to develop policies to encourage the success of those needing Applicant Support in the public interest. Rubens Kuhl: .OSAKA was decided between two applicants on a Community Priority Evaluation, there were two applications with non-objection from the government. One was community and one was not. avri doria: but Geo was an emergent 'category' while community was a defined category. perhaps that is the reason for overlap. avri doria: but perhaps geo and community are not both categories but one of them is an attribute that can be applied to multiple categories. kavouss arasteh: Yes ,highly regulated is totally different than sensitive category kavouss arasteh: different from Rubens Kuhl: Avri, we could define categories as mutually exclusive and attributes as non-exclusive to move the discussions along. Donna Austin, Neustar: @Avri, geo was a category because of additional requirements. community was a category because of different requirements. Exclusive Use Registries and closed generics: Hold for a longer discussion Open TLD with minor domain charter registration challenges: Does not seem materially different than Open registries Governmental Organization Applicants: Applicant Support Applications: Talk about this to determine if any differentiations have to be made in policy. Are there any other potential categories? >From the chat: Jamie Baxter | dotgay: i actually thought there were only standard and community TLDs as options in the 2012 round, however geo was a box that required checking when completing an application and as Donna pointed out, it required additional requirements Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry): Would it be because of contractual restrictions (e.g., with ICANN)? avri doria: Jamie, that is somewhat what i mean by the difference between categories and attributes that can be applied to any category. Next exercise: Look at the next two columns: Attributes for specific purpose? A set of specific requirements for the applicant? Example: Brand TLDs: Attributes: -- Often closed registration policies. -- Likely minimal need for registrar services. -- Registrations likely do not drive income. -- Possibly lower bars for technical/financial capabilities. -- Likely less (or no) need for registrant protections. Requirements for Applicants: As defined in applying for Specification 13. 4. Any other business -- Summary Documents from Staff: -- shared with the leadership team. See: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1A5uaxBAgmg7QsFuqMdVvt1HxNZ4jKXnm3Hp… -- Purpose: Recognition that there are so many topics that it is how to understand where the status is for any given topic. -- Also could be for other people in the community who might be interested in following. -- Captures deliberation, problem statements, CC2 comment integration. -- Want to add the dependencies between topics.

1 0

Proposed Agenda: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group, 25 September 2017 at 20:00 UTC
by Steve Chan 22 Sep '17

22 Sep '17

Dear WG Members, Below, please find the proposed agenda for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG meeting scheduled for Monday, 25 September 2017 at 20:00 UTC. Please note, this call is scheduled for 90 minutes. Welcome/SOIs Work Track Updates Drafting Team Discussion continued – Different TLD Types (Wiki Page: https://community.icann.org/x/YKLRAw and Working Document:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mA_hTUhLhJSsfcmoQwREtUqxyk…) AOB Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org mobile: +1.310.339.4410 office tel: +1.310.301.5800 office fax: +1.310.823.8649 Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages. Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/ http://gnso.icann.org/en/

1 0

to all celebrating HOSH HASHANAH...
by Vanda Scartezini 19 Sep '17

19 Sep '17

L’Shanah Tovah Lots of joy in this new year to you and whole family! Kisses Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos.

1 0

Nomination of Plenary Co-chair post Abu Dhabi
by Karen Day 18 Sep '17

18 Sep '17

Dear fellow PDP members, Following on Jeff’s announcement during our last call that Avri will be stepping down as plenary co-chair at the time she transitions to her seat on the ICANN Board, I am very pleased to nominate Cheryl Langdon-Orr to assume the role of plenary co-chair to serve alongside Jeff upon Avri’s departure. Cheryl is the current co-chair of Work Track 4 and her SOI is available for your review here https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Cheryl+Langdon-Orr+SOI Thank you for your consideration, Karen Day Co-Chair WT 3

7 7

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Nomination of Plenary Co-chair post Abu Dhabi
by Arasteh 15 Sep '17

15 Sep '17

Cheryl Thank you very much accepting to assume this huge and important responsibility Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone > On 14 Sep 2017, at 03:23, Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > EXTERNAL > > Karen, > > Thank you for the confidence you show in me, with your nomination for me to be considered for this role, noting of course that no one could ever fill a role Avri has performed, as well as she does, I would be honoured to undertake the task to the best of my abilities, if it is the will of the PDP Working Group that I do so. > > > Cheryl Langdon-Orr ... (CLO) > > about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr > > > > >> On 14 September 2017 at 11:10, Karen Day <Karen.Day(a)sas.com> wrote: >> Dear fellow PDP members, >> >> >> >> Following on Jeff’s announcement during our last call that Avri will be stepping down as plenary co-chair at the time she transitions to her seat on the ICANN Board, I am very pleased to nominate Cheryl Langdon-Orr to assume the role of plenary co-chair to serve alongside Jeff upon Avri’s departure. Cheryl is the current co-chair of Work Track 4 and her SOI is available for your review here https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Cheryl+Langdon-Orr+SOI >> >> >> >> Thank you for your consideration, >> >> Karen Day >> >> Co-Chair WT 3 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list >> Gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg >

1 0

Co-Chair / Vice Chair Position (Was: RE: Nomination of Plenary Co-chair post Abu Dhabi)
by Jeff Neuman 13 Sep '17

13 Sep '17

Thanks Karen for initiating this process and for Cheryl accepting the nomination (in a subsequent e-mail). Just for fairness purposes, and to give others the opportunity to formally put their names forward, I would like to start a 9 day nomination period for the role of either co-chair and/or Vice Chair of the SubPro PDP. The nomination period will end just prior to the next full Working Group call on September 25th. The full leadership team (Avri and I as well as each of the Work Track leaders) discussed this position during our call today. Given where we are with our work heading towards the drafting of the Preliminary Report, the leaders are recommending the following: 1. If a current member of the leadership team puts his or her name forward to be considered and they are supported by the full working group (and approved by the GNSO Council), that person can choose to serve as either a co-chair or vice chair of the full Working Group. 2. If a person that is a member of the full working group puts his or her name forward to be considered and they are supported by the full working group (and approved by the GNSO Council), that person will serve as a vice chair of the full Working Group as opposed to a co-chair. The rationale for this recommendation relates not to the competency of the person that volunteers (and is approved), but rather to the steep learning curve for someone not currently on the leadership team to become a co-chair of the full working group. The leadership team has met virtually every week for the past year and a half (I believe over 50 times by now), has held two lengthy strategy retreats (over the phone) and has expertise in the subject matters, strategy, milestones, deliverables, etc. The time and resources needed to train a member of the leadership team to serve as a co-chair would be significantly less than the time and resources (of both myself, the new candidate, ICANN staff, etc.) to be prepared to serve as a co-chair. So what is the difference between a co-chair and a vice chair. In my mind, with respect to serving on the full leadership team, having input into making strategic recommendations to the working group, planning for future meetings, etc., there is very little difference. However, the primary role of a Vice-Chair is to chair the plenary meetings and fill in for the Chair in other events when the Chair is unable to attend. He or she will also be responsible for other administrative and other day-to-day tasks required to performed by the leadership team. He or she is invited to participate in all leadership calls. A co-chair, however, is a co-equal with the Chair. He or she will assist in overseeing the full working group, share the chair responsibilities of the plenary meetings, oversee two of the work tracks, have the ability to speak on behalf of the Working Group when updating the GNSO Council, GAC, etc. (where it is appropriate for a chiar/co-chair to speak on behalf of the group), etc. A vice chair may be called upon to do some of these activities depending on the circumstances, but that would be at the discretion of the Chair (who relies heavily on the entire leadership team). These are just some of my thoughts that I wanted to share with the full group and are just recommendations. Feedback of course is welcome and we can discuss on the next Plenary call. In the meantime, please submit any nominations on the full list. I only ask that you check with the person to make sure he or she is willing and able to devote the time to Nominations due by no later than September 25th at 19:59:00 UTC. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600 Mclean, VA 22102, United States E: jeff.neuman(a)valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com> or jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 @Jintlaw From: gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Karen Day Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 9:11 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Nomination of Plenary Co-chair post Abu Dhabi Dear fellow PDP members, Following on Jeff’s announcement during our last call that Avri will be stepping down as plenary co-chair at the time she transitions to her seat on the ICANN Board, I am very pleased to nominate Cheryl Langdon-Orr to assume the role of plenary co-chair to serve alongside Jeff upon Avri’s departure. Cheryl is the current co-chair of Work Track 4 and her SOI is available for your review here https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Cheryl+Langdon-Orr+SOI Thank you for your consideration, Karen Day Co-Chair WT 3

2 2