Jeff, I support your original proposal subject to notes below). The 120
rule seems to be just too small a detail and I am not sure it can be
justified.
I agree that priority should be explicitly requested (with the warned
implication that if delegated early, they must be prepared to
launch).
I presume that all decisions on who is in a round or which IDNs are
selected is a random selection.
Alan
At 2020-04-13 10:33 PM, Jeff Neuman wrote:
Thanks Anne. The Applicant
Guidebook did talk about using batches of 500 if there are more than 500
applications. I will dig that up ad then create an affirmation for
that. So, it looks like we may have a possible workable
solution.
Would love to hear more feedback on the proposal. Tomorrow, I will
re-write the proposal based on the feedback and create an example.
Jeff Neuman
Senior Vice President
Com Laude | Valideus
D: +1.703.635.7514
E:
jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@lrrc.com>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 4:51 PM
To: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>;
alexander@schubert.berlin; gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Prioritization of IDNs proposal
(Proportional Prioritization)
Hi Jeff,
Thanks – assuming the 2012 round had 120 idn applicants, I would
say:
1. If there are 120 idn applicants (or fewer) who check the box that they
want priority, process those first. Those who don’t request
priority get thrown into the remaining random batches and treated the
same as all other applications.
.
2. If more than 120 idn applicants want priority, I would go with your
recommended system, but I would say that we should be processing no fewer
than 50 idn applications per batch if that many have applied for priority
processing.
It might help if we were to come up with a “batch size†and
“randomization†recommendation in collaboration with ICANN
GDD. Then we would have more of a basis for recommending
something
Anne
From: Jeff Neuman
<jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 1:07 PM
To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne
<AAikman@lrrc.com>;
alexander@schubert.berlin;
gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Prioritization of IDNs proposal
(Proportional Prioritization)
[EXTERNAL]
Yes, I am making an assumption because we are creating a process that
needs to not only apply to the next round, but needs to be
repeatable. Without knowing a specific volume in advance, I am
making a proposal based on a formula.
So, If I understand your modification, it would be:
- If there are <120 IDN applications, those applicants that want
priority will be processed prior to non-IDN applications.
- If there are >120 IDN applications, 120 of the IDN applications
will be processed before any non-IDN applications. The remainder of
the IDN applications shall be processed in the following manner:
- In the first batch of 500, which includes the 120 initially reviewed
IDN applications, the remaining 380 applications shall be randomized
including all IDN and non-IDN applications.
- The other batches shall work according to the example below.
Example
In a batch of 500, priority #1-120 must be IDNs; 121-500 can be
either IDN or non-IDN applications. In other words if a particular
IDN application is not chosen in #1-50, it would have a equal chance of
being selected in 51-500.
In the next batch of 500 (Applications #501-1000), #501 - #550 must be
IDN (if there are any left), and #551-1000 can be either IDN or
non-IDN
In the next batch of 500 (Applications #1001 – 15000), #1001 - #1050 must
be IDN (if any are left), and #1051 -1500 can be either IDN or
non-IDN…..etc
Thus in a round with more than 1500 application, there would be a
guarantee of evaluating at least 150 IDN applications PLUS any IDN
applications showing up in the randomized drawings for the remaining
1,350 spots.
I hope this works as a reasonable compromise.
Jeff Neuman
Senior Vice President
Com Laude | Valideus
D: +1.703.635.7514
E:
jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne
<AAikman@lrrc.com>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 3:53 PM
To: Jeff Neuman
<jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
>;
alexander@schubert.berlin;
gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
Subject: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Prioritization of IDNs proposal
(Proportional Prioritization)
Hi Jeff – it appears the logic relates to DELAY in prrocessing idn
applications. The assumption appears to be that there are TONS of
IDN applications. NOT SURE THIS ASSUMPTION IS CORRECT.
I was just suggesting a friendly amendment, IF THERE ARENâ€T MORE IDN
APPLICATIONS THAN LAST TIME, why not let them move forward? If
there are a bunch more, as assumed by your hypo, then we could RATION the
processing of idn applications – not sure that 10% is rright and would
welcome others views on this.
No silos here – just a questioon re the underlying assumption of extreme
DELAY.
Anne
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg
<
gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jeff
Neuman
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 12:40 PM
To:
alexander@schubert.berlin;
gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Prioritization of IDNs proposal
(Proportional Prioritization)
[EXTERNAL]
All,
Sorry, I took it as a given that an IDN that did not want priority could
opt out of prioritization. So that will be baked in.
To respond to Anne, the public comment was mixed on whether there should
be prioritization. Many commenters opposed ANY priority. Yes,
some proposed them having priority.
So, if we can think outside the box, I ask you to critique the proposal
with the following rules:
- ASSUME ONLY PRIORITY FOR THOSE APPLICANTS THAT WANT IT, and
- ASSUME YOU CANNOT PICK ALL IDNS HAVE PRIORITY nor CAN YOU PICK
NO IDNs HAVE PRIORITY.
Sorry, for the ALL CAPS, but I want us to try to see what we can live
with and not stick to our silos.
Thanks in advance for trying again.
Jeff Neuman
Senior Vice President
Com Laude | Valideus
D: +1.703.635.7514
E:
jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg
<
gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Alexander
Schubert
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 3:24 PM
To:
gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Prioritization of IDNs proposal
(Proportional Prioritization)
Hi,
I think we have to bake the priority-request-issue already into the
application:
In my mind it doesn’t make any sense if we proactively prioritize
applicants that then won’t launch their TLDs.
Any application that has a “sunrise period†provision in their
application and is seeking prioritization should be forced to execute
such sunrise within XX month after TLD testing. If you have a sunrise
period and want prioritization: then execute your sunrise.
Hence we should require applicants to indicate already in their
application whether they request a potentially available prioritization.
If you don’t yet know how or when you start up: don’t ask for
prioritization.
Thanks,
Alexander
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg
[
mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Maxim
Alzoba
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 7:46 PM
To: Rubens Kuhl
<rubensk@nic.br>
Cc:
gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Prioritization of IDNs proposal
(Proportional Prioritization)
Why don't we add (in some ICANN style legal language)
"Chosen IDN applicants have the right not to use the results of such
prioritization, and in this case
the respective applications will fall into non-prioritized
batches".
P.s: I think saying "or they go into the end of the queue" is
another extreme and we need to avoid that too.
Sincerely Yours,
Maxim Alzoba
Special projects manager,
International Relations Department,
FAITID
Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow)
- On 13 Apr 2020, at 19:07, Rubens Kuhl
<rubensk@nic.br> wrote:
-
-
- What if the IDN applicant prefers not being a first mover ? That was
the case of brands in 2012, for instance.
-
- While I'm happy providing priority if the IDN applicant wants it,
although evaluation priority address just one of the many issues faced by
IDNs, I don't think we should prioritise applications that want exactly
the opposite.
-
-
- Rubens
-
-
- On 13 Apr 2020, at 12:55, Jeff Neuman
<jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
> wrote:
-
- All,
-
- In an effort to offer a compromise between those that favor the
prioritization of all IDN applications and those that do not favor the
prioritization, I wanted to see if I could provide a compromise
solution.
-
- Background
- The prioritization of IDN applications was a decision made by ICANN
org well after all applications were submitted in 2012 and made a lot of
sense to the community for the following reasons. (1) There were
only approximate 115 IDN applications out of 1930 (about 6% of the
applications); (2) it was the first round to ever accept applications for
new IDN gTLDs, (3) part of the rationale for the first expansion was for
innovation and expansion of the name space to the global community and
(4) it was a good thing to do for the increased globalization of the
Internet.
-
- Those in favor of prioritization of IDNs still believe that despite
not being the first round, reasons (3) and (4) are still worthy of
pursuing. Many who are not in favor of prioritization are afraid
that the next round could see thousands of new applications including
thousands of IDNs. To prioritize all IDNs up front could take
months or even years (in theory) before a new non-IDN could be
processed.
-
- Proposal – Proportional Prioritization>
- What is we stated that the first 10% of each batch of applications
must consist of IDN applications until there are no more IDN
applications. Therefore, if ICANN wants to create batches of 500
applications, the first 50 of each application batch processed must be
IDNs. The remaining 450 would be random (of both IDN and Non-IDN
applications).
Example
In a batch of 500, priority #1-50 must be IDNs; 51-500 can be either
IDN or non-IDN applications. In other words if a particular IDN
application is not chosen in #1-50, it would have a equal chance of being
selected in 51-500.
In the next batch of 500 (Applications #501-1000), #501 - #550 must
be IDN (if there are any left), and #551-1000 can be either IDN or
non-IDN
In the next batch of 500 (Applications #1001 – 1500), #1001 - #1050
must be IDN (if any are left), and #1051 -1500 can be either IDN or
non-IDN…..etc
Thus in a round with more than 1500 application, there would be a
guarantee of evaluating at least 150 IDN applications PLUS any IDN
applications showing up in the randomized drawings for the remaining
1,350 spots.
I hope this works as a reasonable compromise.
Jeff Neuman
Senior Vice President
Com Laude | Valideus
1751 Pinnacle Drive
Suite 600, McLean
VA 22102, USA
M: +1.202.549.5079
D: +1.703.635.7514
E:
jeff.neuman@comlaude.com
www.comlaude.com
<image003.jpg>
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to
the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in
any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received
this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body
of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and
permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not
accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to
scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude
Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the
sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member
entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a
company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and
registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN
England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell
Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in
Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33
Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba
Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive,
Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a
company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite
319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further
information see
www.comlaude.com
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link
above to change your membership status or configuration, including
unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery
altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link
above to change your membership status or configuration, including
unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery
altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the
intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any
way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received
this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body
of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and
permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not
accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to
scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude
Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the
sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member
entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a
company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and
registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN
England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell
Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in
Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33
Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba
Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive,
Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a
company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite
319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further
information see www.comlaude.com
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.
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the
intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any
way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received
this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body
of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and
permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not
accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to
scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude
Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the
sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member
entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a
company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and
registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN
England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell
Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in
Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33
Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba
Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive,
Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a
company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite
319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further
information see www.comlaude.com
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.
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the
intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any
way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received
this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body
of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and
permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not
accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to
scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude
Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the
sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member
entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a
company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and
registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN
England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell
Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in
Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33
Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba
Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive,
Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a
company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite
319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further
information see www.comlaude.com
_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
with the ICANN Privacy Policy
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link
above to change your membership status or configuration, including
unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery
altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.