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

FINAL DEADLINE FOR CC1 COMMENTS IS TODAY
by Jeff Neuman Aug. 19, 2016

Aug. 19, 2016

All, Just a reminder that today is the deadline to receive input from the cc1 questionnaire that was sent out on June 9th (71 DAYS AGO). To date I believe we have only received responses from the ccNSO, GAC and RySG. Nothing from the ALAC, RrSG, IPC, BC, ISPC, NCUC, etc. If responses are not submitted today, we will assume that those groups will not be responding and we will base our CC1 findings on the discussions of the group and the statements we have received thus far. Thanks. 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

2 1

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Letter from Steve Crocker to GNSO Council Chair
by policy＠paulmcgrady.com Aug. 17, 2016

Aug. 17, 2016

5 4

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Letter from Steve Crocker to GNSO Council Chair
by policy＠paulmcgrady.com Aug. 17, 2016

Aug. 17, 2016

1 0

Update: Survey on Newcomer Tools
by Nathalie Peregrine Aug. 16, 2016

Aug. 16, 2016

Dear ICANN Community member, Further to our previous email we have encountered some technical difficulties with the survey which was previously sent out. To that end we have prepared a replacement and would ask you to still complete it by 11 September 2016. The revised survey is available here - https://goo.gl/forms/nUO214NICcPm7jc83 The responses which have already been received will be tracked through by staff to ensure their inclusion in the final report. Should you have any further comments please do not hesitate to contact us. Kind regards, David From:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Nathalie Peregrine Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:20 AM To: gnso-rpm-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] Survey on Newcomer Tools Dear ICANN Community member, We need your input to improve GNSO newcomer and training tools. GNSO Council has directed<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201607> staff to develop a survey to assess the familiarity that the community has with the different newcomer and training tools as well as their perceived usefulness. Staff would kindly request that you complete the attached survey available here<http://www.clicktools.com/go?iv=1063kkc3v1m98>. Please provide your response by 11 September 2016. Should you have any further comments please do not hesitate to contact us. Kind regards, David Tait David A. Tait Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: + 44-7864-793776 Email: david.tait(a)icann.org<mailto:david.tait@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

1 0

Survey on Newcomer Tools
by Nathalie Peregrine Aug. 16, 2016

Aug. 16, 2016

Dear ICANN Community member, We need your input to improve GNSO newcomer and training tools. GNSO Council has directed<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201607> staff to develop a survey to assess the familiarity that the community has with the different newcomer and training tools as well as their perceived usefulness. Staff would kindly request that you complete the attached survey available here<http://www.clicktools.com/go?iv=1063kkc3v1m98>. Please provide your response by 11 September 2016. Should you have any further comments please do not hesitate to contact us. Kind regards, David Tait David A. Tait Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: + 44-7864-793776 Email: david.tait(a)icann.org<mailto:david.tait@icann.org> www.icann.org

3 3

Letter from Steve Crocker to GNSO Council Chair
by Jeff Neuman Aug. 16, 2016

Aug. 16, 2016

All, I came across this letter in passing and thought it was useful to send to the group as it relates to our work. One of the items I would like to ask each work track to think about is the key question raised here:, namely within the work tracks, "Are there a set of critical issues that can be identified to be addressed prior to a new application process?" Or, is it the view of the Community that the entire PDP must be completed prior to a new process? I believe the identification of these issues is a critical first step of the work tracks and will help to produce work plans for the respective tracks. I am cc'ing GNSO Council leadership on this email to keep them in the loop. 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

4 3

LAST CALL on CC1 / No Call Monday
by Jeff Neuman Aug. 12, 2016

Aug. 12, 2016

All, The co-chairs met today and decided that because no additional CC1 responses came in this past week that we would cancel the Monday full group call on the 15th. However, the Work Tracks will begin as scheduled next week on the 16th (Work Track 1) and the 18th (Work Track 2). Please look out for a cancellation notice for Monday's meeting as well as agendas for the first calls of Tracks 1 and 2. The Full Group will meet again on Monday, August 22nd. Also, I would like to issue a Last Call on responses to CC1 by Friday, August 19th. Please let us know if there will be any difficulties in making this new (third and final) deadline. If we do not receive responses by the 19th, we will assume that you respective constituency/Stakeholder Group/ Advisory Committee would like to sit this comment period out. Thank you to the GAC and Registries for already submitting your comments. Please let us know if you have any questions. Best regards, Jeff Neuman Avri Doria Co-Chairs

1 0

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Letter from Steve Crocker to GNSO Council Chair
by Jeff Neuman Aug. 9, 2016

Aug. 9, 2016

Resending as I mistakenly put Volker on this email as opposed to Donna. Sorry for the duplication. 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: Jeff Neuman Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2016 1:44 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org Cc: James Bladel (jbladel(a)godaddy.com) <jbladel(a)godaddy.com>; Heather Forrest <Heather.Forrest(a)acu.edu.au>; Volker Greimann <vgreimann(a)key-systems.net> Subject: Letter from Steve Crocker to GNSO Council Chair All, I came across this letter in passing and thought it was useful to send to the group as it relates to our work. One of the items I would like to ask each work track to think about is the key question raised here:, namely within the work tracks, "Are there a set of critical issues that can be identified to be addressed prior to a new application process?" Or, is it the view of the Community that the entire PDP must be completed prior to a new process? I believe the identification of these issues is a critical first step of the work tracks and will help to produce work plans for the respective tracks. I am cc'ing GNSO Council leadership on this email to keep them in the loop. 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

1 0

Mp3, UPDATED Attendance & AC Chat for New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG 08 August 2016
by Michelle DeSmyter Aug. 8, 2016

Aug. 8, 2016

Dear All, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Monday, 8 August 2016 at 16:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-08aug16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-08aug16-en.mp3> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-16may16-en.mp3> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-09may16-en.mp3http://a…> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/_ACsAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 8 August 2016 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group, Monday, 08 August 2016 16:00 UTC. Jeff Neuman:All - We will start in 3 minutes Jeff Neuman:1 minute.... Karen Bernstein:Good day everyone Richard Padilla:Hi all Christa Taylor:yes Paul McGrady:yes Christa Taylor:lol Emily Barabas:connecting with her now Freida Tallon .Sky:Hello All Avri Doria:i cannot hear. will have to do something. i heard during check. Paul McGrady:We are. A few more days Phil Marano (Mayer Brown):IPC membership call tomorrow, most likely a topic for discussion. Cecilia Smith:I reached out to the Chair o& Policy coordinator and they said they would send out, but I haven't seen anything. I will follow up this morning. Nathaniel Edwards:Apologies for late arrival Paul McGrady:Happy to do so. Will post to Council list. Jeff Neuman:@Avri - Yes. We have good participation on the lists, but not necessarily during the calls Cecilia Smith:Correction, BC will send out to group for discussion, not sure if/when response will be returned to WG. Donna Austin, Neustar:The RySG comments support the introduction of new gTLDs in the future. Jeff Neuman:Can we post a link to the RySG comment to show their response Julie Hedlund:@Jeff: It is on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/59645660/RySG%20comments%2…. Karen Bernstein:Isn't the whole purpose of this to decide whether there should be second round? Karen Bernstein:Ok Christa Taylor:The different categories could also tie in to application fees Carlton Samuels:@Christa: +1 VANDA:@carlton , yes agree too Carlton Samuels:@Avri: There was some baseline attributes to geographic, just not itemised in one place in the GB Carlton Samuels:@Jeff: This WG would be remiss if we didn't address the idea/concept/category generally called "community". Avri Doria:Community was one of the categories in the AGB. we may want to discuss how it was done, but it is not new as a category Carlton Samuels:@Avri: Soo true. But both ALAC and the GAC had concerns about definition and structural elements. VANDA:guess due the problem some community had with the previous work on colecting support ... Robin Gross:I also have concern about the way the concept of "community" has evolved at ICANN. Donna Austin, Neustar:I just found this text in the RySG response as part of the reply to 2c: We do not believe that regulated and highly-regulated TLDs should be treated as a separate category of TLDs from the application process as these categories were solely derived from GAC Advice and not self-designation by the applicant. Paul McGrady:Will dial in VANDA:Ia gree with Donna Robin Gross:I believe we should consider doing away with community as a category in the future, in part, due to its arbitariness. Robin Gross:arbitrariness Paul McGrady:On the phone line now, ready to try again. Carlton Samuels:@Jeff: Definition on community for clarity is the ALAC's position Karen Day-.JMP:+1 Paul Steve Coates:For generics, I think we should spend some time discussing definitions. Paul McGrady:Thanks Avri Donna Austin, Neustar:@Jeff, which is the same for regulated and highly regulated. Paul McGrady:But Spec 11 didn't exist when the AGB was published. The issue here is notice to new applicants, rather than surprises. VANDA:my point shouls be informed but not established as a category Paul McGrady:I'm agnostic on what we call it, but if closed generics need not apply, we just need to be up front about it. VANDA:@paul - agree Jeff Neuman:@paul - Agreed the rules need to be clear Paul McGrady:Avri - agree. Laura Watkins:Agree and think that makes sense but the only caution I would say that we should avoic being too prescriptive - there should be options for applicants that don't fit into set categories Donna Austin, Neustar:I think they're called Donna Austin, Neustar:generic Donna Austin, Neustar:sorry Avri, I was being flippant Paul McGrady:This is a big issue. Can we agree to talk to indecision today pending additional responses from the other Cs and SGs? Christa Taylor:+1 Donna Grace Mutung'u:rounds should be more predictable...maybe every three -five years to allow those catching up with the Internet opportunity? Donna Austin, Neustar:yes, an ongoing process Donna Austin, Neustar:Correct Jeff Jeff Neuman:I agree it is two points Kurt Pritz:Thiis is the current policy: "All applicants for a new gTLD registry should therefore be evaluated against transparent and predictable criteria, fully available to the applicants prior to the initiation of the process. Normally, therefore, no subsequent additional selection criteria should be used in the selection process." VANDA:+ 1 Donna, ongoing process to allow specially developing countries to be more prepared. Carlton Samuels 2:The A/C room has been flacky since morning for me VANDA:for me too.... Donna Austin, Neustar:No objection from me. Good to have the discussion. Steve Coates:Terrible time logging in today. Carlton Samuels 2:I thought we were looking at engagement in the applciation process? That is VERY early in the process, no? Carlton Samuels 2:@Donna: That would be helpfu but in the ALAC's view the engagement process takes on a wider perspective; we need more discussants from different places in the circle. Carlton Samuels 2:@Avri: The latter, during application process Carlton Samuels 2:@Avri: Yes Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):indeed Avri Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I suspect ALAC would agree with this point Donna we were under impressed with thd 'outreach' VANDA:we had NO outreach in this south region here.. I personally did some and got some new applicants but nothing really organized outreach. Paul McGrady:Outreach can always be improved. Donna Austin, Neustar:RySG comment: Notwithstanding the ultimate goal of a continuous process, the RySG does not support the notion of placing unnecessary limitations on future applicants. This would be anti-competitive, has the potential to inhibit innovation: and, as such, is antithetical to the purpose of introducing new gTLDs. Paul McGrady:Should we ask Staff if they can handle 10,000 applications? Mary Wong:This would be a question for Akram/GDD :) Paul McGrady:Thanks Mary! Thanks Avri! Paul McGrady:I predicted 596. Boy, was I wrong, Nathaniel Edwards:I agree. Enforcement/community/objections costs will be out of control for 10,000+ applications. Paul McGrady:Great call today Avri. Thanks for keeping us on track. VANDA:very productive emeting, thanks Avri! Christa Taylor:Thank-you Avri! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Thx everyone, bye for niw then... THANKS Avri more taalk whn it is NT 0330 Richard Padilla:bye all Cecilia Smith:Thanks you! Karen Day-.JMP:goodbye thanks Freida Tallon .Sky:Thanks and Bye all

1 0

Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat for New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG 08 August 2016 16:00 UTC
by Michelle DeSmyter Aug. 8, 2016

Aug. 8, 2016

Dear All, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Monday, 8 August 2016 at 16:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-08aug16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-08aug16-en.mp3> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-16may16-en.mp3> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-09may16-en.mp3http://a…> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/_ACsAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 8 August 2016 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group, Monday, 08 August 2016 16:00 UTC. Jeff Neuman:All - We will start in 3 minutes Jeff Neuman:1 minute.... Karen Bernstein:Good day everyone Richard Padilla:Hi all Christa Taylor:yes Paul McGrady:yes Christa Taylor:lol Emily Barabas:connecting with her now Freida Tallon .Sky:Hello All Avri Doria:i cannot hear. will have to do something. i heard during check. Paul McGrady:We are. A few more days Phil Marano (Mayer Brown):IPC membership call tomorrow, most likely a topic for discussion. Cecilia Smith:I reached out to the Chair o& Policy coordinator and they said they would send out, but I haven't seen anything. I will follow up this morning. Nathaniel Edwards:Apologies for late arrival Paul McGrady:Happy to do so. Will post to Council list. Jeff Neuman:@Avri - Yes. We have good participation on the lists, but not necessarily during the calls Cecilia Smith:Correction, BC will send out to group for discussion, not sure if/when response will be returned to WG. Donna Austin, Neustar:The RySG comments support the introduction of new gTLDs in the future. Jeff Neuman:Can we post a link to the RySG comment to show their response Julie Hedlund:@Jeff: It is on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/59645660/RySG%20comments%2…. Karen Bernstein:Isn't the whole purpose of this to decide whether there should be second round? Karen Bernstein:Ok Christa Taylor:The different categories could also tie in to application fees Carlton Samuels:@Christa: +1 VANDA:@carlton , yes agree too Carlton Samuels:@Avri: There was some baseline attributes to geographic, just not itemised in one place in the GB Carlton Samuels:@Jeff: This WG would be remiss if we didn't address the idea/concept/category generally called "community". Avri Doria:Community was one of the categories in the AGB. we may want to discuss how it was done, but it is not new as a category Carlton Samuels:@Avri: Soo true. But both ALAC and the GAC had concerns about definition and structural elements. VANDA:guess due the problem some community had with the previous work on colecting support ... Robin Gross:I also have concern about the way the concept of "community" has evolved at ICANN. Donna Austin, Neustar:I just found this text in the RySG response as part of the reply to 2c: We do not believe that regulated and highly-regulated TLDs should be treated as a separate category of TLDs from the application process as these categories were solely derived from GAC Advice and not self-designation by the applicant. Paul McGrady:Will dial in VANDA:Ia gree with Donna Robin Gross:I believe we should consider doing away with community as a category in the future, in part, due to its arbitariness. Robin Gross:arbitrariness Paul McGrady:On the phone line now, ready to try again. Carlton Samuels:@Jeff: Definition on community for clarity is the ALAC's position Karen Day-.JMP:+1 Paul Steve Coates:For generics, I think we should spend some time discussing definitions. Paul McGrady:Thanks Avri Donna Austin, Neustar:@Jeff, which is the same for regulated and highly regulated. Paul McGrady:But Spec 11 didn't exist when the AGB was published. The issue here is notice to new applicants, rather than surprises. VANDA:my point shouls be informed but not established as a category Paul McGrady:I'm agnostic on what we call it, but if closed generics need not apply, we just need to be up front about it. VANDA:@paul - agree Jeff Neuman:@paul - Agreed the rules need to be clear Paul McGrady:Avri - agree. Laura Watkins:Agree and think that makes sense but the only caution I would say that we should avoic being too prescriptive - there should be options for applicants that don't fit into set categories Donna Austin, Neustar:I think they're called Donna Austin, Neustar:generic Donna Austin, Neustar:sorry Avri, I was being flippant Paul McGrady:This is a big issue. Can we agree to talk to indecision today pending additional responses from the other Cs and SGs? Christa Taylor:+1 Donna Grace Mutung'u:rounds should be more predictable...maybe every three -five years to allow those catching up with the Internet opportunity? Donna Austin, Neustar:yes, an ongoing process Donna Austin, Neustar:Correct Jeff Jeff Neuman:I agree it is two points Kurt Pritz:Thiis is the current policy: "All applicants for a new gTLD registry should therefore be evaluated against transparent and predictable criteria, fully available to the applicants prior to the initiation of the process. Normally, therefore, no subsequent additional selection criteria should be used in the selection process." VANDA:+ 1 Donna, ongoing process to allow specially developing countries to be more prepared. Carlton Samuels 2:The A/C room has been flacky since morning for me VANDA:for me too.... Donna Austin, Neustar:No objection from me. Good to have the discussion. Steve Coates:Terrible time logging in today. Carlton Samuels 2:I thought we were looking at engagement in the applciation process? That is VERY early in the process, no? Carlton Samuels 2:@Donna: That would be helpfu but in the ALAC's view the engagement process takes on a wider perspective; we need more discussants from different places in the circle. Carlton Samuels 2:@Avri: The latter, during application process Carlton Samuels 2:@Avri: Yes Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):indeed Avri Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I suspect ALAC would agree with this point Donna we were under impressed with thd 'outreach' VANDA:we had NO outreach in this south region here.. I personally did some and got some new applicants but nothing really organized outreach. Paul McGrady:Outreach can always be improved. Donna Austin, Neustar:RySG comment: Notwithstanding the ultimate goal of a continuous process, the RySG does not support the notion of placing unnecessary limitations on future applicants. This would be anti-competitive, has the potential to inhibit innovation: and, as such, is antithetical to the purpose of introducing new gTLDs. Paul McGrady:Should we ask Staff if they can handle 10,000 applications? Mary Wong:This would be a question for Akram/GDD :) Paul McGrady:Thanks Mary! Thanks Avri! Paul McGrady:I predicted 596. Boy, was I wrong, Nathaniel Edwards:I agree. Enforcement/community/objections costs will be out of control for 10,000+ applications. Paul McGrady:Great call today Avri. Thanks for keeping us on track. VANDA:very productive emeting, thanks Avri! Christa Taylor:Thank-you Avri! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Thx everyone, bye for niw then... THANKS Avri more taalk whn it is NT 0330 Richard Padilla:bye all Cecilia Smith:Thanks you! Karen Day-.JMP:goodbye thanks Freida Tallon .Sky:Thanks and Bye all

1 0