- Gnso-newgtld-wg - lists.icann.org

Post Call | New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group | Tuesday, 06 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Aug. 6, 2019

Aug. 6, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Tuesday, 06 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/SaujBg> (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, Andrea

1 0

Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Tuesday, 06 August at 03:00 UTC
by Emily Barabas Aug. 2, 2019

Aug. 2, 2019

Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Tuesday, 06 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Draft Agenda: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of summary document: (continued) * Terms and Conditions, page 24 – See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11mtncTwPLPx6vpbunACToRZy1vWyls-MxVAb3wq…<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> * Application Queuing, page 2 – See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nf8qGP9Y7OYuT0ZvxIgM1fZtNa4Kj8DyhzpmPhE…<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nf8qGP9Y7OYuT0ZvxIgM1fZtNa4Kj8DyhzpmPhE…> 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>. Kind regards, Emily Emily Barabas | Policy Manager ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Email: emily.barabas(a)icann.org | Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976

1 0

Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 1 August 2019
by Emily Barabas Aug. 1, 2019

Aug. 1, 2019

Dear Working Group members, Please see below the notes from the meeting today, 1 August 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/x/YqujBg. Please note in the action items below that the leadership team welcomes additional input on several topics discussed on today’s call and covered in the public comment summary document here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11mtncTwPLPx6vpbunACToRZy1vWyls-MxVAb3wq…. Specifically, the leadership team would like your input on whether any of the concerns or new ideas presented in the comments warrant further discussion from the group on the following topics related to Applicant Support: * How should Applicant Support applications be prioritized if there are more qualified applicants than resources available? (see page 19 for summary of public comments) * Is there agreement that aside from comments from the Indian government, there is not support for continued financial support for applicants beyond application fees? (see page 20 for summary of the comment from Government of India) * How should the Applicant Support Program be funded? (see page 22 for summary of public comments) * What metrics could be used to measure the success of the Applicant Support Program? (see page 23 for summary of public comments) * Is any additional discussion needed on the new ideas and concerns raised regarding the Applicant Support Program, string contention resolution and auctions? (see page 23 for summary of public comments) * Should there be a dedicated application round for applicants from developing countries? (see page 23 for summary of public comments) You can find the full text of the public comments on this topic here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133WbhWYB4M4kT6DqSfiCR2-ij7jxNkLj5EW… Kind regards, Emily 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest None 1. Review of summary document: (continued) * Applicant Support, page 19, beginning of with a continuation of the sub-section on Eligibility (https://docs.google.com/document/d/11mtncTwPLPx6vpbunACToRZy1vWyls-MxVAb3wq… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>) * On the last call, the focus of the conversation was the proposal that an applicant support candidate could transfer to a standard application if the applicant support application was unsuccessful. Some support was expressed for this idea and some concerns about potential “gaming” were also considered. * Some clarification has been provided by Justine on ALAC comments on this issue (see document for text added by Justine). * Populations/Regions served: Reminder that ICANN Org is reviewing some of the terminology that has been used in the context of discussions about applicant support, but is also used elsewhere – such as “underserved” and “underrepresented.” The ICANN Org review is not focused on policy development, specifically, but in different areas of ICANN’s work. It may be appropriate to coordinate workstreams. ICANN Org analysis is moving away from “Global South” terminology. * Review of comments on methods for selecting ASP recipients if there are more applicants than funds/resources. * Note that regarding the nomenclature of “Global South” there was a suggestion to look at the UNDP Human Development Index as a resource. * One member expressed support for a bucketed approach for funding, for example with respect to IDNs. ACTION ITEM: Seek additional input on mailing list regarding how to prioritize applicant support applications if there are more qualified applicants than resources. * Review of CCT-RT recommendations on this topic passed through by the Board. * Reminder of text from the Board resolution related to CCT-RT recommendations: “Board notes that the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG could take on, should they choose to do so, defining the term “Global South” in coordination with ICANN org, its engagement teams, and geographic regions definitions to create a workable definition, or agreeing on another term to describe underserved or underrepresented regions or stakeholders in coordination with ICANN org.” * Review of comments regarding the scope of support, for example, financial support for the application only, other forms of financial support, or non-financial support such as mentorship and consulting resources. * One member noted concern about additional costs during the application process aside from the application fee, such as contention resolution in the case of a contention set. * It was noted that there are still discussions underway regarding auctions of last resort. * Another member noted that there are ongoing costs in addition to the application fee that applicants need to plan for. * A member raised that operational viability could be somewhat established through the financial aspect of the ASP criteria. * One member noted and some other members agreed that aside from the Indian Government, it appears that there is no other support for ongoing financial support for applicants beyond the application fees. * Staff noted that the high level agreements capture some support for financial assistance beyond the fee itself. * A member noted that these include costs related to the application, such as professional services, but this is different from registry-level fees. ACTION ITEM: Confirm on the mailing list that beyond comments from the Indian government, there is not support for continued financial support for applicants beyond application fees. * Clarification from staff on the Indian Government’s comment regarding the fee for middle applicants – the comment appears to propose a reduced fee for middle applicants that is higher than the standard fee and lower than the fee for applicant support recipients. * Some concern raised about complexity of such a fee structure. * Review of comments regarding the possible review of the applicant’s business plan as part of the application evaluation process. * Review of comments on outreach and learning strategy for the applicant support program. * Suggestion from one member that it should be added to the high-level agreements the comments support more education and awareness-raising with a focus on the appropriate timing. This is more of an implementation element than a policy recommendation. * Review of comments on program funding. ACTION ITEM: Solicit input on the mailing list on the topic of program funding. Also seek mailing list input on metrics to measure success; additional considerations raised regarding ASP, string contention resolution, and auctions; and the proposal to provide a dedicated round for applicants from developing countries. 1. AOB * Next meeting scheduled for Tuesday 6 August at 3:00 UTC. Emily Barabas | Policy Manager ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Email: emily.barabas(a)icann.org | Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976

1 0

**Please read** Member wiki page check/SOI check
by Julie Bisland Aug. 1, 2019

Aug. 1, 2019

Dear all, In an effort to ensure accuracy, please take a moment to check your GNSO SOI and make any needed updates. In addition, would all members and observers kindly visit the WG Members wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/Ogp1Aw and verify affiliation is correctly displayed. For any updates needed to the member wiki page or if assistance is needed with your GNSO SOI, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. Much thanks to you all, GNSO SO/AC Support -- Julie Bisland GNSO SO/AC Support coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: julie.bisland(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.bisland@icann.org> Skype ID: 79613b691cb8a6c1 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwM…> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGN…> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar<https://features.icann.org/calendar>

1 0

Post Call / New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group / Thursday, 01 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 1, 2019

Aug. 1, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Thursday, 01 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/YqujBg> (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

Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 29 July 2019
by Julie Hedlund July 30, 2019

July 30, 2019

Dear Working Group members, Please see below the notes from the meeting today, 29 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/2019-07-29+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Pr…. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes and Action Items: Action Items: From 15 July 2019: ACTION ITEM 1: Applicant Freedom of Expression - Input on Implementation Guidelines - LRO: Work on language for the high-level agreement to reflect fairness and balance. ACTION ITEM 2: Universal Acceptance: Rewrite the high-level agreement text. Include a link to the USAG work. From 18 July 2019: ACTION ITEM 3: On this comment: Concerns: ICANN org - ICANN org is not aware of any “75 steps” document and is unclear about what “documentation related to the process used in setting fee in the 2012 round is being referenced in this section. It would be helpful if the PDP Working Group could clarify. ACTION: To the WG to clarify. From 25 July 2019: Application Submission Period: ACTION ITEM 1: New Ideas: BC Comment -- Clarify what they mean by “Consider providing “a way to keep non-contentious applications open if they need more time to complete.”” ACTION ITEM 2: Application Submission Period, possible new High-Level Agreement -- An application submission period or communication period should not be considered separately, but taken together. There should be a formal communication period of at least 6 months, but there is nothing to prevent efforts to provide awareness outside of that period. ACTION ITEM 3: New High-Level Agreements: -- All subsequent windows should be the same length as the initial application window. -- The communications period should commence at least 6 months prior to opening the application submission period. ACTION ITEM 4: If someone applies for a string that is unresolved from a prior round would there be a refund? Refunds haven’t been discussed, but need to be at a meeting and on the list. Applicant Support: ACTION ITEM AND NOTE: Consider adding to high-level agreement: Applicants that don’t meet the requirements should have the option to withdraw their application or pay the remaining application fee. NOTE: Need to consider the timing of the application being accepted, particularly if the applicant is receiving other types of assistance. Also, need to consider concerns about gaming (see ICANN Org’s comment). From 29 July 2019: For Discussion: There seems to be support for an applicant support program that fails to meet the criteria for applicant support, that they are able to switch their string to a mainstream application process. Variations on implementation and concerns that need to be discussed. For Discussion: There Seems to be support that there should not be prioritization just because you are an applicant support application. Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided. 2. Review of summary document: (continued) – See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11mtncTwPLPx6vpbunACToRZy1vWyls-MxVAb3wq… Application Submission Period, page 18 Policy goals: * New Idea: ICANN Org - To ensure that the program is designed, implemented, and operated to meet its intended purpose, PDP should define the goals and key success factors for the program. Ability to transfer to standard application if application does not meet ASP criteria (see also related topic: Prevention of “gaming the system”): * New Idea: ALAC/RySG - If transfer is permitted, applicant must be given a reasonable amount of time to pay the additional fee. Prevention of “gaming the system”: * Concern/New Idea: ICANN Org - 2012 rules preventing transfer from an ASP to standard application were put in place after extensive community discussion in order to prevent gaming. If there are no penalties or other mechanisms to prevent gaming and no geographic location criteria, there will likely be many ASP applications. The WG should consider the impact on costs to process applications and to fund applicants who do qualify, as well as the impact on program timelines. Discussion: -- Opportunity for an applicant to move from the Applicant Support program to the regular program, but to allow reasonable time. -- So, ICANN's Org point over gaming is noted but the potential incidence of gaming should be handled differently and not be the main cause of dampening the number of potential applicants for ASP. -- Correct, ICANN org’s comment is not an objection against allowing applicants to pay the remaining fees to continue in the program, but rather was meant to raise a potential issue for the PDP WG to discuss. -- Need to think about what we mean by “reasonable amount of time”. Might depend on whether the string is in contention, so whether you are holding up other applicants. -- Question: Does the WG believe the potential for gaming is to be accepted, or should alternative mitigations be explored? -- Question: If the applicant can transfer into the mainstream process, does the string stay the same? Answer: Would think that with any transfer the string must stay the same. -- There is also gaming that would happen if an applicant is denied support and then moves into the mainstream then you could come into competition. -- Another form of gaming in moving to the mainstream application process if there is an ability to change the string. -- In terms of mitigations, for instance, there could some form of a quick look mechanism, akin to that in objections. -- There are a couple of dependencies, such as with approval of a geographic name. -- Reiterate that the timing of the evaluation of applicant support vs timing of the application process is important here. -- Discussion in the work track about a possible penalty for switching programs. -- the tangible benefit from 2012 version of Applicant Support was limited to a reduced fee amount. It had no bearing on the type of application or string type.  -- For Discussion: Seems to be support for an applicant support program that fails to meet the criteria for applicant support, that they are able to switch their string to a mainstream application process. Variations on implementation and concerns that need to be discussed. -- Applicants claiming support would be notified BEFORE the "big reveal" that they don't qualify for support - and would have to commit to pay the full amount - and the applicants for THAT string (if there are several) will only be revealed after ALL applicants have paid their full fees. Then the "gamer" has no information "gain" - and gaming makes no sense anymore. Additional Text from the ALAC: * Applicants (including their representatives) whose application(s) are determined by SARP to be subject of willful gaming should be disallowed from participating in any application for Applicant Support for a specified period. SARP’s evaluation methodology should include a component for determining incidences of willful gaming. -- Some of this depends on the support being provided through the program, but I agree with the principle that willful gaming should be discouraged. Eligibility: -- Applicant support doesn’t mean applicant priority. -- If we hang this on “underserved region” we need to think what that would mean. -- Need to define what is “underserved” and “middle applicant”. Are these defined by the UN? -- I can't remember exactly what was said but there was discussion on the regions that the UN designated as underserved and how applicable/up to do the list is/what it is updated. -- ICANN Org is starting to look at what “underserved” and “under-represented” might mean. Moving away from the term “Global South”. There are various definitions out their including in the UN about “underserved”. They tend to be very specific to medical or health issues. Doesn’t seem to be a single definition. It might be helpful to have a consistent usage across the Org and the community. -- Consistent between ICANN Org and community definitions -- also from an evaluation perspective, for a more objective evaluation then it will be helpful to have a very narrow definition. ICANN Org used UN lists for 2012. -- ICANN Org is not trying to dictate the outcomes of the PDP discussions. -- Could we please have an action item to ask ICANN Org to share their thinking on "underserved/under-developed communities/regions" 'in moving away from Global South'? For Discussion: There should not be prioritization just because you are an applicant support application.

2 1

Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Thursday, 01 August at 03:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund July 29, 2019

July 29, 2019

Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Thursday, 01 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Draft Agenda: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of summary document: (continued) * Applicant Support, page 19, Eligibility (continued) – See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11mtncTwPLPx6vpbunACToRZy1vWyls-MxVAb3wq… * Terms and Conditions, page 24 – See above. 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). A PDF snapshot also is attached for reference. 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

Post Call / New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group / Monday, 29 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland July 29, 2019

July 29, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Monday, 29 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/nqijBg> (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

Proposed Agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting - Monday, 29 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund July 26, 2019

July 26, 2019

Dear WG members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 29 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC for 90 minutes: Draft Agenda: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of summary document: (continued) – See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11mtncTwPLPx6vpbunACToRZy1vWyls-MxVAb3wq… * Applicant Support, page 18 * Terms and Conditions, page 24 (time permitting) 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). A PDF snapshot also is attached for reference. 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

Post Call / New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group / Thursday, 25 July 2019 at 15:00 UTC
by Michelle DeSmyter July 25, 2019

July 25, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Thursday, 25 July 2019 at 15:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page (<https://community.icann.org/x/lqijBg>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, Michelle

1 0