Dear Jeff
Dear Steve,
Thanks for the helpful tracks
Reagrds
Kavouss

2016-04-04 0:52 GMT+02:00 Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>:
Dear Kavouss,

To add to what Jeff mentioned, here is a bit of additional detail/context that you will hopefully find useful.

The subjects that are contained in the Charter (http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-charter-21jan16-en.pdf) and the Final Issue Report (http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-final-issue-04dec15-en.pdf), stem from the work of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group (http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/inactive/2015/non-pdp-new-gtld) that preceded this PDP, which reflected upon the experiences from the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program to identify subjects for future possible policy development. The Final Issue Report seeks to provide additional detail and analysis around these subjects, which could be considered the "difficulties, shorthcoming, deficiencies and problems encountered” from the community’s perspective. Jeff already provided the link to the ICANN staff developed New gTLD Program Reviews, which I think directly answers your question.

In regards to contacting the GAC, outreach to the SO/ACs is a required step in the policy development process. The PDP WG will need to collectively work together to establish a set of questions to pose to the SO/ACs and it has been preliminarily agreed to by the WG that more than one set of questions (based on the Tracks) is likely to be needed during these outreach efforts.

Geographic names are discussed in Section 4.3.1: Reserved Names of the Final Issue Report linked above.

Best,
Steve

 

From: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 1:59 PM
To: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>
Cc: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>, "gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>

Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Proposed Agenda for 4 April 2016

Dear Jeff
Thank you very much for the advice
 One of the head ache that we have had and still having in the GAC is Geographic Name
 We have also another head ache which is Geographic Identification
WHERE THESE THINGS ARE ADDRESSED
Regards
Kavouss

2016-04-03 22:57 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>:
Dear Jeff
Thank you very much for the advice
 One of the head ack  

2016-04-03 21:02 GMT+02:00 Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>:

Dear Kavouss,


We have noted all of those great suggestions from the previous call and have them as action items.  Many of them relate to Track 3 which we will address at a later point when we split up into different subteams to work on the different tracks.  I would also like to remind the Working Group to review the ICANN Final Implementation Report at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/program-review-29jan16-en.pdf.  That may address some of the topics you reference below.

 

On our next call, the plan is to review the 2007 high level principles, make sure we think they are still relevant (or whether they need some changes) and see if there are any high level overall principles we should be coming up with to govern the introduction of subsequent TLDs.  Then, time permitting, we will go into the first one or two overall questions. 

 

I hope that helps.

 

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@valideus.com or jeff.neuman@comlaude.com

T: +1.703.635.7514

M: +1.202.549.5079

@Jintlaw

 

 

From:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh via Gnso-newgtld-wg
Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 3:21 AM
To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] - Proposed Agenda for 4 April 2016

 

Dear Steve,

Thank you very much for the message

At the last meeting of the Group,I raised the need to receive a report from ICANN on difficuilties, shorthcoming, defficiencies and problems encountred in implementing the first gTLD rould.

I also implicitly suggested that SOs/ACs , in particular, GAC be formally asked to make a list of the above mentioned issues (difficuilties, shorthcoming, defficiencies and problems encountred in implementing the first gTLD rould) and any proposed remedial actions

Moreover, I did suggest that a list of identical strings, and singular, plural strings and issue of different meaning of a string in different lanuages  ,the issue of Autions, advantages and disadvantages be also addressed.

May you pls advise on these also

Tks

Kavouss .  

 

2016-04-01 20:41 GMT+02:00 Steve Chan via Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>:

Dear WG Members,

 

Below, please find the proposed agenda for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG meeting scheduled for Monday 4 April 2016 at 22:00 UTC.

  1. Review agenda
  2. Roll Call/SoIs
  3. Discussion on response to Dr. Crocker (Draft letter to be distributed by Steve Coates)
  4. Discussion regarding principles from 2007 Final Report (excerpt attached)
  5. Discussion on Subject 1: Should there in fact be new gTLDs?
  6. Discussion on Subject 2 (Time Permitting): TLD Types/Differentiation 
  7. AOB

Best,

Steve

 

 

Steven Chan
Sr. Policy Manager

ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
steve.chan@icann.org

direct: +1.310.301.3886
mobile: +1.310.339.4410

tel: +1.310.301.5800

fax: +1.310.823.8649


_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg