July 2019 - Gnso-newgtld-wg

Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Monday, 15 July 2019 at 15:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund July 11, 2019

July 11, 2019

Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 15 July 2019 at 15:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Draft Agenda: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of summary document: (continued): * Applicant Freedom of Expression (https://docs.google.com/document/d/15rwviHM6AYtqDqyB6_5Yij2dTL6iuou8z7A32yz…) – start at Input on Implementation Guidelines – General, top of page 10; * Universal Acceptance (time permitting), page 11 3. AOB Note, in relation to agenda item 2, WG leadership and staff have tried to prepare summary documents for each topic that seeks to help you review some of the background material, consider a high-level summary of what we believe the WG is seeking to accomplish for the topic, a high-level summary of public comment received, and finally, a catch all at the end of each section (e.g., follow-up, parking lot, next steps). If you need a dial out or would like to send an apology for this call, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. Best, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

1 0

Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 11 July 2019
by Julie Hedlund July 11, 2019

July 11, 2019

Dear Working Group members, Please see below the notes from the meeting today, 11 July 2019. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat, which will be posted at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-07-11+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Pr…. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes and Action Items: Action Items: ACTION ITEM re: CCT-RT Recommendations and ALAC Statement -- Questions for Justine Chew: 1. Is ALAC's position documented anywhere? 2. On the CCT Review - Does John's comment refer to ALL CCT Recommendations or to just those prerequisites (as labeled by the CCT Review Team) 3. With respect to the RPM PDP, does John's comment relate to just Phase 1 of the PDP or to both Phase 1 and 2. 4. The value of precedent within the ALAC...I will flush this one out further by comparing answers from Community Comment 1 and 2. Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): None provided. 2. Review of summary document: (continued) -- Global Public Interest (https://docs.google.com/document/d/15rwviHM6AYtqDqyB6_5Yij2dTL6iuou8z7A32yz…) – start at Verified TLDs, Page 6 Verified TLDs: -- Updated the sections on mandatory and voluntary PICs to include divergence from the Public Interest Community and the NCSG. -- The word “likelihood” should be fixed. Edit and check with IPC re: IPC comment and the word “likelihood”. Typo in the original comment. -- As as it's been applied a verified TLD is one that verifies the potential registrants meets registry standards prior to registering a domain. So for instance, the registry operator might require registrants to be appropriately credentialed to practice where they do business. And that's where that implied trust comes in, I think, so that end users can trust that domains in that TLD are going to be authentic. CCT-RT Recommendations: -- For absolute clarity, is the ALAC position that the RPM PDP must be completed in its entirety (ie, Phase 1 and Phase 2) prior to next round commencing? -- As a reminder, this WG has a tracking sheet for all of the CCT-RT recommendations aimed at SubPro: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PGV5_nMafLWtSHyCGdr-b8eqoJj9B8YKBSh…. And it has been updated to take into account what the Board has passed through to SubPro. -- John Laprise - to answer Jeff's question, could you add to your email earlier today to the SubPro list re ALAC position the document in which this position is recorded? ------------------------ ALAC statement: From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of John Laprise <jlaprise(a)gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 22:20 To: "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Cc: 'ALAC Members' <ALAC-members(a)icann.org>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] ALAC position on newgTLD subpro Hi everyone, Just a useful reminder of ALAC’s position as asserted to ICANN GDD at ICANN65: ALAC will not support a new gTLD round until full implementation of CCT and RPM recommendations are fully implemented. Best regards, John Laprise, Ph.D. NARALO ALAC Representative ALAC Vice Chair-Policy ---------------------- -- Can staff please send me [Justine] an AI on the questions being posed with respect to John Laprise's comment? Thanks. Questions: 1. Is ALAC's position documented anywhere? 2. On the CCT Review - Does John's comment refer to ALL CCT Recommendations or to just those prerequisites (as labeled by the CCT Review Team) 3. With respect to the RPM PDP, does John's comment relate to just Phase 1 of the PDP or to both Phase 1 and 2. 4. The value of precedent within the ALAC...I will flush this one out further by comparing answers from Community Comment 1 and 2. --- @jeff, in respect of your #4 my immediate answer is what you term as a “precedent”; is not precedent in the actual sense of the word, but ALAC positions are not immune to change with developments over time. -- Thanks Justine - This is why seeing the rationale and not just the final position/resolution/outcome is important. -- Jeff, your question #4 seems to assume that, if there is a difference in position between Comment 1 and 2, that somehow this indicates that ALAC has disregarded or “devalued” “precedent.” I don’t think that’s a fair assumption. -- Given that we have only one very high-level articulation of a high-level agreement and many divergent points under outstanding items;, it's not clear to me what our overall objective is in this section. Are we hoping to distill from outstanding items more points as high-level agreements? -- Thanks, Jeff - looking for commonalites makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. -- One thing to consider is that the policy goal may not be achievable, insofar as we are not able to work out some explicit implementation matrix (ie, X weighs heavier than Y) -- @Greg- and therein lies the problem. Reaching agreement on a definition has not yet been achieved at the level of international law, so us achieving that here is a big ask. Freedom of Expression: -- High-level agreement -- Support: May not be accurate. May need a more neutral phrase. Need to provide specific implementation guidance. Need to better define what is meant by “applicant freedom of expression”. Broader term than freedom of speech. -- Difficult for the WG to develop a definition since it hasn’t yet been done. -- High level agreement is that there are freedom of expression rights. -- Start with Implementation Guidelines section on the next call.

3 3

ALAC position on newgTLD subpro
by John Laprise July 11, 2019

July 11, 2019

Hi everyone, Just a useful reminder of ALAC's position as asserted to ICANN GDD at ICANN65: ALAC will not support a new gTLD round until full implementation of CCT and RPM recommendations are fully implemented. Best regards, John Laprise, Ph.D. NARALO ALAC Representative ALAC Vice Chair-Policy

2 2

Post Call | New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group | Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland July 11, 2019

July 11, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/LaSjBg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members can join the call, observers can listen to the recordings and read the transcript afterwards. Please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> if you would like to change your status from observer to member. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/RgV1Aw>. Thank you. Kind regards, Julie

1 0

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] [Ext] RE: Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 08 July 2019
by Julie Hedlund July 11, 2019

July 11, 2019

Many thanks for the helpful clarification Jim. Kind regards, Julie From: Jim Prendergast <jim(a)GALWAYSG.COM> Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 at 5:36 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 08 July 2019 Thanks Julie One edit under notes – “Could ask RSSAC and SSAC whether the WG’s recommendations are consistent with their advice (relating to the third bullet point under High Level Agreements).” My recommendation was for the WG to send the entire section dealing with Root Scaling to the SSAC and RSSAC for a quick look to ensure we have accurately captured their sentiment and the interplay between both of their work on this topic. Not just the 3rd bullet point. I agree with your suggestion that we not look for formal “advice” but with the revelation that in Marrakech members of the SSAC were surprised that eliminating the 1,000 per year delegation limit was on the table, I do think we need a right track/wrong track assessment and feedback from both groups due to the highly technical nature of this material and the importance it plays in the ICANN assumptions as well as pace of the overall program. They can review the material in parallel while we are working on the other material ahead of us so no risk to the timeline. Thanks Jim Prendergast The Galway Strategy Group +1 202 285 3699 @jimpren From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 5:31 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 08 July 2019 Dear Working Group members, Please see below the notes from the meeting today, 08 July 2019. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat, which will be posted at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-07-08+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Pr…. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes and Action Items: Action Items: ACTION ITEM: Leadership to send a note to Cyrus and Trang asking what is the best way to send comments on the ICANN Org/GDD Assumptions document. State that we are still in discussion on topics in your assumptions, such as annual window or delegation rates, so it may be premature to assume concerning those subjects. ACTION ITEM: GAC formally advised the Board re: need for a formal cost/benefit analysis of the new gTLD Program before launching another round. Check on how the Board has responded. Status of Advice to the Board per Board scorecard appears here: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/board-advice-status-report-pdf-… [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste…> ACTION ITEM: Delegation rates: Discuss what to say instead of a limit of 1000, such as the rate of change. See language from Anne Aikman-Scalese: “The WG supports the RRSAC and SSAC advice that an overall cap of 1000 annually is not the appropriate measure of stability. Rather, it is the rate of delegation (adding names to the root) and the WG recommends that further work be done on the appropriate rate of delegation from a technical standpoint.” Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): No updates provided. 2. Update from ICANN65 Session 1: -- Discussion on ICANN Org/GDD assumptions to begin preliminary planning for the next round on new gTLDs. ICANN Org is seeking feedback. -- Will the WG be responding to it? Not sure if the WG needs to respond. -- Perhaps WG Co-Chairs could send thoughts to the Council. Council is expecting an update on GDD before determining if, and on what, they would respond. -- WG may need to get back if there is anything counter to the WG recommendations. -- WG Co-Chairs provided an update to the GAC Focal Group. See: https://65.schedule.icann.org/meetings/1058193 [65.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__65.schedule.icann.org_…> -- Question: GAC formally advised the Board re need for a formal cost/benefit analysis of the new gTLD Program before launching another round. How has the Board responded to that? Did they delegate to the GNSO? Answer: The WG has not been delegated with this question. 3. Topics Connected to GDD's draft assumptions for implementation efforts -- Delegation Rates (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q6_DxsCvSA_3B7ArncO2U4tWNY3vH7Wi4nINrou… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>) Root Scaling: -- Question: Regarding the delegation rates in the last round, do we know what was the highest number of delegations performed in a single day? That may guide us on whether the annual figure could be changed upwards. -- Policy goals have not changed. -- SSAC and RSSAC are in agreement: it is the rate of change -- SSAC Response: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/4.6.1+Security+and+Stability?prev… -- Could ask RSSAC and SSAC whether the WG’s recommendations are consistent with their advice (relating to the third bullet point under High Level Agreements). -- Could say that we have not found a technical rationale for limiting to 1000 delegations per year. The important factor is the rate of delegation. If we don’t use the number 1000, how do we replace it?

6 16

APOLOGIES new gTLDS WG call July 11, 3UTC
by Vanda Scartezini July 11, 2019

July 11, 2019

dear colleagues. my apologies , I will not be able to attend this call as well the enxt one – will be traveling to a country side region with difficult connection. wish you all successful meetings 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

Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund July 10, 2019

July 10, 2019

Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Draft Agenda: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of summary document: (continued) -- Global Public Interest (https://docs.google.com/document/d/15rwviHM6AYtqDqyB6_5Yij2dTL6iuou8z7A32yz…) – start at Verified TLDs, Page 6 3. AOB Note, in relation to agenda item 2, WG leadership and staff have tried to prepare summary documents for each topic that seeks to help you review some of the background material, consider a high-level summary of what we believe the WG is seeking to accomplish for the topic, a high-level summary of public comment received, and finally, a catch all at the end of each section (e.g., follow-up, parking lot, next steps). If you need a dial out or would like to send an apology for this call, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. Best, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

4 4

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Steve Chan July 10, 2019

July 10, 2019

Hi Anne, Indeed, an old version of the timeline slide got stuck in a couple sets of slides by mistake. Attached, please find the latest version of the high-level timeline slide, which was actually captured accurately in the pre-ICANN65 webinar slides (here: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/presentat…) Best, Steve From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 at 3:46 PM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC Hi Julie – could we please have the corrected timeline slide. I think the one that was displayed in our F2F meetings in Marrakech was not the updated one. I checked online but am still searching. Thank you, Anne From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 12:15 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC [EXTERNAL] Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Draft Agenda: Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest Review of summary document: (continued) -- Global Public Interest (https://docs.google.com/document/d/15rwviHM6AYtqDqyB6_5Yij2dTL6iuou8z7A32yz…) – start at Verified TLDs, Page 6 AOB Note, in relation to agenda item 2, WG leadership and staff have tried to prepare summary documents for each topic that seeks to help you review some of the background material, consider a high-level summary of what we believe the WG is seeking to accomplish for the topic, a high-level summary of public comment received, and finally, a catch all at the end of each section (e.g., follow-up, parking lot, next steps). If you need a dial out or would like to send an apology for this call, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org. Best, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director 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.

1 0

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Vanda Scartezini July 9, 2019

July 9, 2019

Please apologies. Working travels this week. Successful meeting. 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. From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 at 16:15 To: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Thursday, 11 July 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Draft Agenda: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of summary document: (continued) -- Global Public Interest (https://docs.google.com/document/d/15rwviHM6AYtqDqyB6_5Yij2dTL6iuou8z7A32yz…) – start at Verified TLDs, Page 6 3. AOB Note, in relation to agenda item 2, WG leadership and staff have tried to prepare summary documents for each topic that seeks to help you review some of the background material, consider a high-level summary of what we believe the WG is seeking to accomplish for the topic, a high-level summary of public comment received, and finally, a catch all at the end of each section (e.g., follow-up, parking lot, next steps). If you need a dial out or would like to send an apology for this call, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. Best, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

1 0

Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 08 July 2019
by Julie Hedlund July 9, 2019

July 9, 2019

Dear Working Group members, Please see below the notes from the meeting today, 08 July 2019. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat, which will be posted at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-07-08+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Pr…. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes and Action Items: Action Items: ACTION ITEM: Leadership to send a note to Cyrus and Trang asking what is the best way to send comments on the ICANN Org/GDD Assumptions document. State that we are still in discussion on topics in your assumptions, such as annual window or delegation rates, so it may be premature to assume concerning those subjects. ACTION ITEM: GAC formally advised the Board re: need for a formal cost/benefit analysis of the new gTLD Program before launching another round. Check on how the Board has responded. Status of Advice to the Board per Board scorecard appears here: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/board-advice-status-report-pdf-… ACTION ITEM: Delegation rates: Discuss what to say instead of a limit of 1000, such as the rate of change. See language from Anne Aikman-Scalese: “The WG supports the RRSAC and SSAC advice that an overall cap of 1000 annually is not the appropriate measure of stability. Rather, it is the rate of delegation (adding names to the root) and the WG recommends that further work be done on the appropriate rate of delegation from a technical standpoint.” Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): No updates provided. 2. Update from ICANN65 Session 1: -- Discussion on ICANN Org/GDD assumptions to begin preliminary planning for the next round on new gTLDs. ICANN Org is seeking feedback. -- Will the WG be responding to it? Not sure if the WG needs to respond. -- Perhaps WG Co-Chairs could send thoughts to the Council. Council is expecting an update on GDD before determining if, and on what, they would respond. -- WG may need to get back if there is anything counter to the WG recommendations. -- WG Co-Chairs provided an update to the GAC Focal Group. See: https://65.schedule.icann.org/meetings/1058193 -- Question: GAC formally advised the Board re need for a formal cost/benefit analysis of the new gTLD Program before launching another round. How has the Board responded to that? Did they delegate to the GNSO? Answer: The WG has not been delegated with this question. 3. Topics Connected to GDD's draft assumptions for implementation efforts -- Delegation Rates (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q6_DxsCvSA_3B7ArncO2U4tWNY3vH7Wi4nINrou…) Root Scaling: -- Question: Regarding the delegation rates in the last round, do we know what was the highest number of delegations performed in a single day? That may guide us on whether the annual figure could be changed upwards. -- Policy goals have not changed. -- SSAC and RSSAC are in agreement: it is the rate of change -- SSAC Response: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/4.6.1+Security+and+Stability?prev… -- Could ask RSSAC and SSAC whether the WG’s recommendations are consistent with their advice (relating to the third bullet point under High Level Agreements). -- Could say that we have not found a technical rationale for limiting to 1000 delegations per year. The important factor is the rate of delegation. If we don’t use the number 1000, how do we replace it?

2 1