Hi Anne, 375 “mixed” (non-idn and idns not requesting priority) get processed next. (Could be a bigger number if fewer than 125 idns request priority, in which case, you are done with idn priority. I understand it very different: In the first 500 we have 125 reserved spots for IDNs that elected priority (if there are 125 IDNs that do so). If MORE than 125 IDNs elected priority they may take up spots in the remaining 375 slots (if the “draw mechanism” puts them there). Any IDN that has not elected priority will only be processed AFTER all priority applications are processed. The reason why we want to grant IDN’s the opportunity to request priority is that we think we should allow them to “startup” fast. If they have no desire to do so: I fail to see the motivation to process them with priority? So if we have only 100 IDNs and only 10 elect priority: then only 10 are in the first 500 batch, and the other 490 slots go to non-IDN applicants. We have to leave it to the applicant whether they want a speedy evaluation or not. The 90 IDN applicants who would have NOT elected priority would be processed with all other non-priority applicants. It would be the wish of the applicant to do so. Call it “freedom of slow startup”. Thanks, Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 6:58 PM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>; gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Final Compromise Proposal for the Prioritization of IDN applications Thanks Jeff. The net effect seems to boil down to the following: First batch of 500: The first 125 idn applications (or any lesser number) requesting priority processing get processed first. 375 “mixed” (non-idn and idns not requesting priority) get processed next. (Could be a bigger number if fewer than 125 idns request priority, in which case, you are done with idn priority. Second and subsequent batches of 500: If any idn applications requesting priority remain, the first 50 to have applied for priority get processed first, then 450 “mixed” (non-idn and idns not requesting priority) get processed in each batch. If the remainder of idn applications requesting priority in the second or any subsequent batch of 500 is less than 50, then the mix changes to accommodate all idns requesting priority and the rest of the batch is filled with “mixed” applications. Is the above a correct description? Separately, would there be any point in my bringing up a recommendation to grant some percentage of priority processing to Community applications? Do we have any standing GAC Advice on the point about Community Applications other than the GAC’s urging that we take into account the opinions expressed on this in the Council of Europe report on Community applications? (Once again I am looking at how to shorten times to agreement on policy that may end up as a bottleneck at the ICANN Board. I don’t think anyone on the Board is in the mood to make policy decisions where GNSO and GAC Advice conflict. They will just tell us to go back and “work it out.” Go back and work it out means delay. Anne From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> > On Behalf Of Jeff Neuman Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:47 AM To: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Final Compromise Proposal for the Prioritization of IDN applications [EXTERNAL] _____ All, Thank you all for your thoughtful comments on the previous proposals for the processing of applications. I have assembled the comments and offer this as proposed text for the draft final report. I first lay out what the existing section states followed by the proposed new language: EXISTING LANGUAGE No Agreement: The Working Group notes that in the 2012 round a decision was made by ICANN Org to prioritize applications for IDN strings. Although there was a 30-day public comment period, the decision to prioritize IDN strings was never subject to policy review. Although the Working Group received a number of comments on this issue (both in support and against), the Working Group was not able to come to agreement as to whether IDN applications should receive any priority in subsequent rounds. PROPOSED NEW LANGUAGE Affirmation with modification (Rationale xx): If the volume of applications received significantly exceeds 500, applications will be processed in batches of 500.* *In the 2012 round, the Section 1.1.2.5 of the Applicant Guidebook provided that the first batch would consist of 500 applications, but each subsequent batch was to be only 400 applications. For ease, the Working Group has modified this to an even 500 applications per batch. (See Applicant Guidebook, page I-9). Recommendation (Rationale xx): The Working Group notes that in the 2012 round a decision was made by ICANN Org to prioritize applications for IDN strings. Although there was a 30-day public comment period, the decision to prioritize IDN strings was never subject to policy review. For Subsequent rounds, the Working Group recommends that the following formula must be used with respect to giving priority to Internationalized Domain Name applications: a) First Batch of 500 a. If there are more than 125 applications for IDN strings that elect to participate in the prioritization draw, the first 25% of applications processed in the first batch shall be those applications for IDN strings that elect to participate in the prioritization draw. The remaining 75% of applications in the first batch shall consist of both IDN and non-IDN applications that elect to participate in the prioritization draw. b. If there are less than 125 applications for IDN strings that elect to participate in the prioritization draw, then all such applications shall be processed in the first batch prior to any non-IDN application. b) Each Subsequent Batch of those electing to participate in the Prioritization Draw a. For each subsequent batch. the first 10% of each batch of applications must consist of IDN applications until there are no more IDN applications. b. The remaining applications in each batch shall be selected at random out of the pool of IDN and non-IDN applications that remain. c) Processing of Applications which do not elect to participate in the Prioritization Draw a. When all of the applications that have elected to participate in the Prioritization Draw have been processed, ICANN shall process the remaining applications is batches of 500 applications. b. The first 10% of each batch of applications must consist of IDN applications until there are no more IDN applications. c. The remaining applications in each batch shall be selected at random out of the pool of IDN and non-IDN applications that remain. Example: Assume ICANN receives 3,000 applications. There are 1,200 applications for IDN strings and 1,800 applications for non-IDN strings. 1,000 of the IDN strings and 1,000 of the non-IDN strings elect to participate in the prioritization draw. The remaining 200 IDN string and 800 non-IDN strings have declined to participate in the Prioritization Draw. ICANN shall place the applications in 6 batches of 500 applications in the following manner: Batch 1: 125 of the 1,000 IDN applications (selected during the prioritization draw) shall be processed first. The remaining 750 IDN-applications shall be combined with the 1,000 non-IDN applications. Of those 1,750 applications, 375 of them shall be selected at random to be processed in the first batch. Batch 2: Assume there are 700 IDN applications and 800 non-IDN applications remaining that have elected to participate in the prioritization draw. In the second batch, the first 50 applications processed shall be for IDN strings selected at random. The remaining 450 applications processed in the second batch shall be selected at random from the pool of both the 800 non-IDN applications and the remaining 650 IDN applications. Batch 3: Assume that there are now 400 IDN applications and 600 non-IDN applications that have elected to participate in the prioritization draw. In the third batch, the first 50 applications processed shall be for IDN strings selected at random. The remaining 450 applications processed in the second batch shall be selected at random from the pool of both the 600 non-IDN applications and the remaining 400 IDN applications. Batch 4 Assume there are now only 25 IDN applications and 475 non-IDN applications for the last batch that has elected to participate in the prioritization draw. In this case only 5% of the last batch is comprised of IDN applications. Therefore all of the remaining IDN applications will be processed in the last batch prior to the remaining 475 non-IDN strings. Batch 5: There are now 200 IDN strings and 800 non-IDN strings that have elected not to participate in the prioritization draw. The first 50 applications process in Batch 5 shall be IDN strings. The remaining 450 applications process shall be selected at random from the pool of both the 800 non-IDN applications and the remaining 150 IDN applications. Batch 6: Assume of the remaining 500 applications, 30 of them are for IDN strings and 470 of them are for non-IDN strings. In this case only 7.5% of the last batch is comprised of IDN applications. Therefore all of the remaining IDN applications will be processed in the last batch prior to the remaining 470 non-IDN strings. 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: <mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> jeff.neuman@comlaude.com <http://www.comlaude.com/> www.comlaude.com _____ 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 <https://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.
