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

- Liaisons between PDP WGs on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures and the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs
by Steve Chan June 21, 2016

June 21, 2016

Dear WG Members, On behalf of the co-chairs of the PDP WGs on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures and the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs, staff is pleased to inform you all that Susan Payne and Robin Gross have volunteered and have been selected to jointly serve as liaisons between the two working groups. Their efforts are vital to ensuring that the respective efforts are coordinated effectively and that the scope of work does not overlap nor allow any critical elements to fall through the cracks. Please let staff or the co-chairs know if you have any questions or concerns. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Sr. Policy Manager   ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org direct: +1.310.301.3886  mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 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://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO http://gnso.icann.org/en/

1 0

Actions/Discussion Notes: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG 13 June 2016
by Julie Hedlund June 13, 2016

June 13, 2016

Dear PDP WG members, Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 13 June. 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. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/1.+WG+Meetings. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions/Discussion Notes: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG Meeting, 13 June 2016 1. Review of action items (https://community.icann.org/x/A0WAAw) #12 (also #22) -- Complete. CC1 letters were sent on 10 June. 2. Planning for ICANN56, Helsinki (annotated working draft agenda attached as Word/PDF) a. Cross community session: PDP on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures – Tuesday 28 June, 1700 – 1830 #3 Topics of Broad Community Interest – Request for volunteers as topic leaders to stimulate discussion (point out questions that people could address at the microphone). Volunteers: d. Promoting applications from underserved regions/developing countries: Cheryl Langdon-Orr f. Geographic Names and other Names of public interest (at the second-level) -- May include non-country, territory names, city, etc.: Susan Payne h. (Safeguards/PICs): Alan Greenberg j. How can implementation work proceed in parallel with policy development: Jeff Neuman Action Item: Need a volunteer for e. community applications. Those who submitted community applications should consider introducing the topic in an objective way. b. F2F: PDP on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures – Wednesday 29 June, 1045 – 1500 Action Items: 1) Add a new topic: a streamlined .brand process, under #3 as the last item, if time allows. 2) Publish programs as early as possible with timeframes for planning purposes.

2 1

Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat New gTLD Subsequent Procedures call 13 June 2016 13:00 UTC
by Michelle DeSmyter June 13, 2016

June 13, 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, 13 June 2016 at 13:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-13jun16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-13jun16-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/AiCOAw ***Also, for times and dates of sessions held in Helsinki, please go to: https://meetings.icann.org/en/icann56-sched. You will need to sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar. *** Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 13 June Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG call on Monday, 13 June 2016 at 13:00 UTC. Jeff Neuman:Good morning all Michelle DeSmyter:yes Alexander Schubert:yes Jeff Neuman:good Martin Sutton:yeap susan payne:steve C you are a little quiet. I cannot turn volume up any higher susan payne:a little thank Carlos Raul G.:it is fine Steve susan payne:yes! Steve Coates (Twitter):Will do, Susan. Apologies. Steve Chan:@Steve Coates, I think Susan was talking about this Steve C! Paul McGrady:Any chance Staff could send calendar invites to each of these sessions so that we are all sure to get the time zone conversions correct? susan payne:@steves - yes sorry I emeant Steve Chan :) Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):iCals would be appreciated... Alexander Schubert:Agreed! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Also Happy to 'Start up" the conversation on any of the topics ( as well as seed conversations as required Steve Coates (Twitter):@susan, thank you! This was a conversation that we had on our leadership call. Steve Coates (Twitter):@cheryl - Thank you! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):NP Steve Chan:@Paul, others, we are investigating about the iCal invites Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):agreee Alan Paul McGrady:Can we add other topics on the list, perhaps? I don't want to disrupt the flow this morning, but I think a streamlined .brand process should be included (for example). Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Or we can just pencil Avri in ;-) Alexander Schubert:Obviously CPE was kind of a "problem" .... Steve Coates (Twitter):@Alan Thank you! Steve Coates (Twitter):@paul @Stevechan - We should be able to make that happen with the reshuffle. Paul McGrady:Sound good Paul McGrady:If we can't hear from the community on it in Helsinki, we can try again in Hyderabad. Steve Chan:@Paul, we also have the F2F sessions as well Paul McGrady:@Steve C - will the public be invited to comment during the FTF? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):appreciated Jeff thanks! Paul McGrady:Great! Thanks! Steve Chan:Although as Alan mentioned, attendance might not be as broad. Sara Bockey:thanks all Vlad Dinculescu:thanks All susan payne:great, thanks all Harold Arcos:Thanks all, take care Alexander Schubert:Thanks! jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland):thanks Alan Greenberg:Thanks all, and thanks for retuning time to us! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Byr Carlos Raul G.:that was all????

1 0

- Proposed Agenda
by Steve Chan June 10, 2016

June 10, 2016

Dear WG Members, Below, please find the proposed agenda for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG meeting scheduled for Monday, 13 June 2016 at 13:00 UTC. 1. Review Agenda 2. Roll Call/SOIs 3. Review of action items (https://community.icann.org/x/A0WAAw) 4. Planning for ICANN56, Helsinki (annotated working draft agenda attached as Word/PDF) 5. AOB Those signed up as Members to this PDP WG should have received meeting information from the GNSO Secretariat. If you did not receive these participation details, please contact the GNSO Secretariat for assistance (gnso-secs(a)icann.org) Best, Steve Steven Chan  Sr. Policy Manager   ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org direct: +1.310.301.3886  mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 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://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO http://gnso.icann.org/en/

1 0

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - CC1 Final Draft
by Steve Chan June 8, 2016

June 8, 2016

Tom, all Thank you for the suggested edit, which has been made in the attached document. As we have passed the proposed deadline and all suggested edits have been incorporated, staff will have these letters sent around to each of the community organizations, with a deadline of 45 days from 9 June (i.e., 24 July 2016). The letters will all be added to the WG’s Wiki as well. Best, Steve From: Tom Dale <tom(a)acig.com.au> Date: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 5:59 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>, "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Cc: "gac-leadership(a)icann.org" <gac-leadership(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - CC1 Proposed Final Draft Steve I have made a minor amendment in the attached version on p.2, to replace GAC WG on community applications (the GAC does not have a formal working group on this) with GAC WG on Public Safety. Regards Tom Dale ACIG GAC Secretariat From: <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 9:06 AM To: "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - CC1 Proposed Final Draft Dear WG Members, Staff and the co-chairs would like to express their gratitude for the contributions from WG members during the WG call and on list to improve CC1. The proposed final draft (attached as Word and PDF with redlines) attempts to address the following elements, amongst other improvements: ? Defines “ongoing mechanism” in a footnote on page 4 ? Except in section 3 of Annex A (i.e., Future new gTLDs assessed in “rounds”), rounds has been substituted with application window throughout the document. In question 3.a, there is an attempt to introduce this term for further usage in the document. ? In section 6, all questions were made to ask about total applications in an application window and/or applications from a single entity. As a result, question 6.g, that was specifically targeted to the single entity aspect, was incorporated into 6.c and deleted. ? Question response boxes were removed As noted, our absolute deadline for sending CC1 to the community organizations is 10 June, though sending earlier is preferable. As such, staff would suggest that any comments be received by 7 June 23:59 UTC. If there are any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to let staff or the co-chairs know. Best, Steve Steven Chan Sr. Policy Manager ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 steve.chan(a)icann.org direct: +1.310.301.3886 mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 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://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO http://gnso.icann.org/en/

2 1

Actions/Discussion Notes: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG 06 June 2016
by Julie Hedlund June 8, 2016

June 8, 2016

Dear PDP WG members, Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 06 June. 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. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/1.+WG+Meetings. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions/Discussion Notes: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG Meeting, 06 June 2016 1. Review of action items (https://community.icann.org/x/A0WAAw) #16 Catalog of Advice and Statements from 2012 round of New gTLDs: Response received from the SSAC. #19 Liaison for Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs): Staff is facilitating a search for a volunteer. #22 Drafting Team to Develop Constituency Comment 1: Staff is finalizing the document based on the discussion during the 06 June call. Produce final after 06 June call and send prior to 10 June document deadline. #24 Pull data on who applied, how many applied, and how many for at least the top 10 applicants (from discussion on application limits, pros and cons) – ongoing. Action Item: Incorporate timelines from other efforts, like Advice/Statements, into the PDP WG timeline 2. CC1 Discussion (Working Draft here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Gh8ugZAomD2AGNymmVRgKGP9TA2KQ7BkQbrRAEv…) Action Item: Staff will produce a final document incorporating changes from the meeting on 06 June. Deadline to send - 10 June (but document should go out at the earliest opportunity); give option to SO/AC/SG/Cs to answer either as online questionnaire or in document form. Deadline for responses - recommend 45 days, deadline of 23 July (ICANN56 ends 30 June; RPM WG's input solicitation letter requests responses by 9 July). Discussion Notes: 1. Question 1(b): Will absence of ongoing mechanism have anti-competitive effect for potential applicants - what does "ongoing mechanism" mean? Does this cover all potential methods of having all applications received or something else? ANSWER: Assumption was that this meant "absence of any subsequent procedures for further new gTLDs", what about clarifying further to say "absence of any mechanisms or procedures to apply for any more new gTLDs"? NOTE: Could also define "mechanism" as it is used regularly throughout the document OR just delete the word "ongoing" (phrase "ongoing mechanism" originated in the 2007 GNSO report) CONSENSUS: Co-chairs and staff to discuss refining or modifying existing phrasing, to be shared on the list for resolution. 2. Change final question in each section to specify "on this subject". 3. Add footnote regarding Spec 13 (for Subject 2, page 6). 4. What does "Open TLD with minor charter registration challenges" (one of the several possible categories) mean? Some open TLDs have registration restrictions or may have them subject to a DRP (not the same as validated restricted registries). SUGGESTION: Change to "Challenge Policy Restricted Registry" or render it a sub-type of validated restricted registries or clarify "self-validated" and "prior validation versus subsequent challenges"? In any case, the word "minor" does not seem appropriate - delete "minor" and replace with "self-validated" or other word/phrase? CONSENSUS: Co-chairs and staff to discuss and propose alternative wording to the list. 5. Page 13, change "like ... in the ICANN Bylaws" to "e.g." – OK. 6. Be consistent as to usage of "Subsequent Procedures" (or similar phrasing) rather than "Rounds". Clarify language where necessary. 7. "Aggregate application limit" - intended to differentiate between total applications in a window/process/round versus an individual number of applications in a window/process/round; SUGGESTION - (1) change subject heading to be more precise: "Application Limits during an Application "Round"" – OK. (2) substitute "total" for "aggregate" – OK. 8. Should Subject 6 (Question 6(b)) also cover total number of strings? SUGGESTION - add "and/or the total number of strings" within each of the questions in Subject 6 – OK. 9. 6(e) & 6(f) - could their placement create confusion? Move 6(g) up so it appears first – OK. 10. For 6(g) - "number" not "numbers"; change "entity" to "applicant" – OK.

1 0

- CC1 Proposed Final Draft
by Steve Chan June 8, 2016

June 8, 2016

Dear WG Members, Staff and the co-chairs would like to express their gratitude for the contributions from WG members during the WG call and on list to improve CC1. The proposed final draft (attached as Word and PDF with redlines) attempts to address the following elements, amongst other improvements: · Defines “ongoing mechanism” in a footnote on page 4 · Except in section 3 of Annex A (i.e., Future new gTLDs assessed in “rounds”), rounds has been substituted with application window throughout the document. In question 3.a, there is an attempt to introduce this term for further usage in the document. · In section 6, all questions were made to ask about total applications in an application window and/or applications from a single entity. As a result, question 6.g, that was specifically targeted to the single entity aspect, was incorporated into 6.c and deleted. · Question response boxes were removed As noted, our absolute deadline for sending CC1 to the community organizations is 10 June, though sending earlier is preferable. As such, staff would suggest that any comments be received by 7 June 23:59 UTC. If there are any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to let staff or the co-chairs know. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Sr. Policy Manager   ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org direct: +1.310.301.3886  mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 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://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO http://gnso.icann.org/en/

2 1

- Proposed Agenda
by Steve Chan June 6, 2016

June 6, 2016

Dear WG Members, Below, please find the proposed agenda for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG meeting scheduled for Monday, 6 June 2016 at 16:00 UTC. 1. Review Agenda 2. Roll Call/SOIs 3. Review of action items (https://community.icann.org/x/A0WAAw) 4. CC1 Discussion, continued (redlined and clean drafts attached, in Word and PDF) 5. AOB Those signed up as Members to this PDP WG should have received meeting information from the GNSO Secretariat. If you did not receive these participation details, please contact the GNSO Secretariat for assistance (gnso-secs(a)icann.org) Best, Steve Steven Chan  Sr. Policy Manager   ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org direct: +1.310.301.3886  mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 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://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO http://gnso.icann.org/en/

2 2

Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat for New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG
by Michelle DeSmyter June 6, 2016

June 6, 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, 06 June 2016 at 16:00 UTC. 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…> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-06jun16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-06jun16-en.mp3> 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/GhmOAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 06 June 2016 Michelle DeSmyter: Dear All, Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG call on Monday, 6 June 2016 at 16:00 UTC. Steve Coates (Twitter):Apologies, someone "borrowed" my headset, so I'll be without a phone for the first part of the call. Philip Corwin:Hello all. Regrets but I shall have to exit this call after the first hour. Jim Prendergast:Same for me Susan Payne:hi Avri, you are very muffled Martin Sutton:muffled & echoey Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):audio needs to be better Paul McGrady:Hi all! Susan Payne:yes thanks Martin Sutton:thanks Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):better Avri Doria:on community comment versus constitunecy comment, we just need to confirm what the PDP guidelines mention and perhaps add a note that tis comment period repsonds to that requirement. Mary Wong:@Steve, that is correct Avri Doria:i do support the change, was just being cautious Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Agree Mary Wong:Thanks, Avri - basically the PDP Manual speaks to "statements from SG/Cs" and "input" from other SO/ACs. Avri Doria:ok, constiruency comment was the old terminology. thanks. Susan Payne:@Stave, yes that was what I had in mind thanks Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I see what you mean Greg VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Hi Greg Shatan:We need to avoid jargon and terms of art.... "ongoing mechanism" won't be understood by many who are "in" the process... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I agree Greg we do and avoid ambiguities where we cn Greg Shatan:Especially since there is no such thing as a "mechanism" that is not ongoing in some fashion, based on our jargon. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:The Process = Mechanism Susan Payne:I agree with Greg that "ongoing mechanism" might be misunderstood. Greg's suggestion seems a good one - but we could just define it as a term if it is used throughout if easier VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:this is a Metaphor Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Sounds like we need to deine the term VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:the WG, in My opinion is trying to change or bring about a change and define Something that is used in the ICANN WIDE documentation VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:The Foot Note is good VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:as the word Mechanism will remain relevant to the entire vanda SCARTEZINI:sorry to be so late. without connection till now VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:thats correct Grace Mutung'u:apologies for joining late. catching up Greg Shatan:It's not currently ongoing, based on the definition of ongoing as "in progress". I think it's an unfortunate term to use in this context. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:we should as the WG should only recomend a direction and not getinto an English Literature class Greg Shatan:Especially since one of the issues is whether the mechanism will be "periodic" or "ongoing." Greg Shatan:I will die in a dithc on this one. Greg Shatan:ditch. Steve Coates (Twitter):I like dithc better. Greg Shatan:If I'm confused once a week, that is not "ongoing." VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:we shud now do a time based approach on the mailing. With Suggestions. Later and Move on with the rest of the document. Greg Shatan:If I'm confused continuously, that is ongoing. Avri Doria:a periodic process is an ongoing process. the wheels on my bike for around with periodicity, but it is ongoing. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:ongoingˈɒnɡəʊɪŋ/adjectivecontinuing; still in progress."ongoing negotiations"synonyms: in progress, under way, going on, continuing, happening, occurring, taking place, proceeding, being done, being worked on, being performed, current, extant, existing, existent, progressing, advancing, evolving, growing, developing Greg Shatan:If your bike is stopped, the wheels are not ongoing. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Till the new Process starts, its ongoing Greg Shatan:It's ambigouous and confusing. Rubens Kuhl:Sometimes we need to sacrifice precise language in favor of commonly understable language. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:periodicˌpɪərɪˈɒdɪk/Submitadjective1.appearing or occurring at intervals."the periodic visits she made to her father"synonyms: regular, periodical, at fixed intervals, recurrent, recurring, repeated, cyclical, cyclic, seasona vanda SCARTEZINI:+ 1 Kuhl Steve Coates (Twitter):Not strong on this one either way. Katrin Ohlmer | DOTZON:+1 Rubens Kristina Rosette (Amazon):I see Greg's point. I'd like to see the proposed definition that we're chatting about before making a decision one way or the other. Greg Shatan:Rubens, which one do you consider precise and which do you consider commonly understandable? Rubens Kuhl:I would change the text to "an at some point ongoing", but that would fit my personal taste for precision. Paul McGrady:"orderly, timely and predictable" is what was used before Greg Shatan:Agree let's not beat a dead horse.... Kristina Rosette (Amazon):Yes, it's Monday, but I'd appreciate it if we moved away from the death metaphors. Martin Sutton:Or remove 'Specification 13' for that category Alexander Schubert:test Alexander Schubert:There might be overlaps: E.G. a nonprofit, geo, community Paul McGrady:Challenge Policy Restricted Registry Avri Doria:may be a subtype of valaidated Paul McGrady:Challenge rather than validated. Greg Shatan:self-validated Avri Doria:the minor is not related to size Paul McGrady:Minor/major could change overnight with an XYZ-like sale though. Kristina Rosette (Amazon):"material" wouldn't be correct here, yes? Alexander Schubert:the number of registrations is completely irrelevant to the TLD's impact Greg Shatan:How about "Open TLD with self-validated restrictions"? Paul McGrady:+1 Alexander Jeff Neuman:Correct. I am sure the Registry Operators for .biz and .name would not want be happy with being called minor TLDs :) Steve Coates (Twitter):@paul and @kristina +1 +1 Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Agree Greg Rubens Kuhl:non-legacy would include .biz, .info, .name. Kristina Rosette (Amazon):Have to drop because of conflicting meeting at top of the hour (and need internal transit time). I'll catch up with the end of the transcript. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):bye Avri Doria:thanks Kristina Paul McGrady:Apologies all, but I have to drop off due to a non-profit Board meeting a few blocks away. Avri Doria:thanks Paul Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):bye paul Alexander Schubert:maybe to cover the unknown issues there should be an appeals process! Richard Padilla:Hello all sorry for being late Steve Coates (Twitter):Welcome, Richard. Mary Wong:What about "such as"? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):e.g. is ok VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:The word Rounds is anyways being replaced ? Alexander Schubert:how do you know 100 applications belong to one entity? Steve Coates (Twitter):Vaibhav - I think we should be consistent with not using "rounds." Perhaps "Subsequent Procedures." Avri Doria:Indeed Alexander that is why the questions asks how one could do that. Alexander Schubert:just create 100 legal entities offshore - done Avri Doria:depdns on how the limit is written and subsequent evidence that such was done could cause issues. Greg Shatan:Look at the subject heading.... VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Steve u r Correct VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Steve I Agree Avri Doria:as you said earlier Vaibhav, we are writing this for the SOAC/SG/c not for open comment VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-) VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Yes maam Alexander Schubert:there should be a bonus for those going public with their string UPFRONT! Alexander Schubert:You risk a lot by going public years upfront (like .music or .nyc) - that should be honored! Jeff Neuman:Sorry, not sure what happened to audio Jeff Neuman:But to clarify, I was not talking about a limit to the number of apps per string, but rather the limit being on the number of strings applied for Jeff Neuman:(Sorry for ending in a preposition) Avri Doria:Jeff, ( : Martin Sutton:Could we simply add 'and/or the total number of strings' within each of the questions? Greg Shatan:Revised heading for subject 6: Application limits during an application “round” -- either total applications or applications per applicant. Cecilia Smith:Will there be consideration on whether the applicant already has applied/been awared in the previous round? Alexander Schubert:what if the last round had been limited to 300 strings? how would we have sorted that out? VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:The Word "Round" is also was agreed to be not used- is it ? Greg Shatan:Would there be limits if there weren't rounds? Jeff Neuman:I think g should be moved up to before e Greg Shatan:I would not compare Avri to a background noise.... Avri Doria:i sometimes feel like background noise. Greg Shatan:number should be singular in 6.g. Greg Shatan:That's not why we're calling it aggregate.... Jeff Neuman:can change "entity" to "applicant". But then we should ask whether an "applicant" includes Affiliates Martin Sutton:An applicant can't be an individual Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I thought we were shifting "aggregate" to Total Mary Wong:@Cheryl, yes Jeff Neuman:An applicant in the 2012 "round" could not be an individual (but in theory we can change that) Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):thanks Mary thought I had dropped a stitch ;-) Martin Sutton:@jeff - true, could be changed Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):at 0312 local time quite possible to have missed a point of change of course ;-) Rubens Kuhl:@Jeff, @Martin: likely some applications came from jurisdictions where an individual can incorporate just by saying so without any public license, so that would probably level the field if allowed. Something to look at, when time comes in the PDP. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Greg I am not gonna die in a Ditch VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:PLease do not be Personal Steve Coates (Twitter):If one more person dies in a ditch, the crows will feast for days. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-) VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:I am gonna Tweet to you VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-) Greg Shatan:If you have something to say, say it here. Jeff Neuman:That is why I suggested adding g to be before e Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):that works Jeff Avri Doria:sorry Jeff, i missed you saying it, apologies for repeating it it ass if i had thought of it. Jeff Neuman:No problem. Not sure what happened to my audio so I am resigned to using the chat Avri Doria:ah, though spurious double ssss Dietmar Lenden - Valideus Ltd:i can hear you Alexander Schubert 4:all fine Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):why not online? jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland):Should be a pdf/word - yes Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):or optio bot Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):optio both Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):optioN jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland):As for the GAC, I guess we would be answering with a letter Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):yes Jorge thus options Steve Coates (Twitter):Probably not. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:It could be good if we can wrk more on it and Get it made Objective VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Narrow Choices in some Sections VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Not all of course VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:and sections can have a "Remarks" Mary Wong:It will be a very long online questionnaire due to the length of this document Greg Shatan:Word doc in addition to PDF please, so we can prepare drafts in the document. Mary Wong:Consolidating all the responses if some are online and some are Word/PDF could also be more cumbersome. Jeff Neuman:Like the Guidebook, we can separate into sub fora, one for each section Greg Shatan:We need a tool that allows answers to be put in out of order, saved and edited again. Martin Sutton:Could we request that responses are concise and do not include endless attachments/links so that we only use the responses given to the specific questions Martin Sutton:would help with the review of responses VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Jeff Agree Mary Wong:Agree with Steve; esp as different groups seem to have different preferences for different tools and formats. Steve Coates (Twitter):Dropping off. Apologies. Greg Shatan:I would do 45. We have Helsinki to take into account. Jeff Neuman:As we will likely be working on the tracks, I do not believe giving the extra time would be disruptive of our schedule Mary Wong:Given the number of questions, staff recommends 45 over 35 days for the reasons Steve noted. Jeff Neuman:We will discuss Helsinki next week! Dietmar Lenden - Valideus Ltd:cheers all VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:thanks @Avri @Steve @Jeff Alexander Schubert:bye to all Rubens Kuhl:Congrats to the WG! Rubens Kuhl:Bye! VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Bye All Sara Bockey:than you all jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland):thanks and bye! Christopher Niemi:Thanks. Richard Padilla:bye all Cecilia Smith:thank you Greg Shatan:Goodbye everybody! Freida Tallon:Thanks all Harold Arcos:thanks everyone, take care

1 0

- Draft Community Comment 1
by Steve Chan June 6, 2016

June 6, 2016

Dear WG Members, As agreed on the WG’s call on 1 June, staff has attempted to incorporate the feedback received on the call, as well as attempting to “normalize” the text so that it’s written from a single voice. The starting point was an export of the draft contained in the Google Doc (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Gh8ugZAomD2AGNymmVRgKGP9TA2KQ7BkQbrRAEv…) to a Word document, which was then redlined with proposed changes. I’ve also included a clean document for your ease of reading. In the interest of providing as much time as possible for WG members to consider this latest draft ahead of the next WG call on Monday, 6 June, staff and the co-chairs agreed to share this document without a full review by the co-chairs, though limited discussion was held to discuss the expected changes. As a result, the co-chairs may contribute to suggested changes on the list, alongside WG members. As a reminder, the intent is for WG members to suggest edits on the list ahead of the 6 June meeting, come to agreement on a final version at the conclusion of that meeting, and send to the SO/AC/SG/Cs shortly thereafter. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Sr. Policy Manager   ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  steve.chan(a)icann.org direct: +1.310.301.3886  mobile: +1.310.339.4410 tel: +1.310.301.5800 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://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO http://gnso.icann.org/en/

2 1