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, 11 September 2017 at 15:00 UTC. Attendance of the calls is also posted on the agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/6BkhB MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-11sep17-en.mp3 AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p3d894al8cv/ The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar-23nov&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=AhXNWBtYz-BXb7M2-3qcjKD0yCsmUykhrCZS5i-8AiE&s=QkqbJ4BucKABBgdhi6zxOiNbT63-FeBDIjTRmO2d7XA&e=> ** 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/6BkhB Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 11 September 2017 Julie Bisland:Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG call on Monday, 11 September 2017 at 15:00 UTC Julie Bisland:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_6... Krishna Seeburn - Kris::) Vanda Scartezini:hi everyone Poncelet Ileleji:hi All Annebeth Lange, ccNSO:Greetings from Norway :-) Jeff Neuman:Just checking could people hear me just a minute ago Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hello All Michelle DeSmyter:yes, loud and clear Jeff Neuman:cool/...we will start in 1 minute Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):hi all Karen Day:Hello. I'm in AC chat only until approx 11:45 Jeff Neuman:ok, lets get started :) Phil Buckingham:sure going to try Rubens Kuhl:Jurisdiction is something that should be homogenous among incumbent registries and subsequent procedures registries. Michael Flemming:I think I may have some answers on that but could be open for discussion. Krishna Seeburn - Kris:Agrree with Alan.....it might be something to really consider Rubens Kuhl:California law is only foreseen in the registrar agreements. Rubens Kuhl:Registry agreements are silent on law, so anyone is free to choose and pick which one they prefer. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Registries use their jurisdiction's law with the accredited Registrars (with them). Phil Buckingham:it will also impact on where the lottery for the R2 draw takes place. Robin Gross:Here's the details: In preparation for our next call, Tuesday, 12 September 2017 @ 20:00 UTC, please see below for our proposed agenda.Thanks, Robin__________________________ 1.Welcome & Review of Agenda2. Updates to SOI3. Plenary Update4. CC2 — GAC Objections — Q 3.1.10 – 3.1.11 (see attached)5. CC2 — String Similarity — Q 3.4.1 - 3.4.6 (see attached)6. AOBDiscussion on GAC Early Warnings and GAC Advice in New GTLD program3.1.10 - Do you feel that GAC Early Warnings were helpful in identifying potential concerns with applications? Do you have suggestions on how to mitigate concerns identified in GAC Early Warnings?3.1.11 - What improvements and clarifications should be made to GAC Advice procedures? What mitigation mechanisms are needed to respond to GAC Advice? How can timelines be made more precise?Discussion on String Similarity3.4.1 - There was a perception that consistency and predictability of the string similarity evaluation needs to be improved. Do you have examples or evidence of issues? Kavouss Arasteh:Too low Steve Chan:The next WT3 call is: Tuesday, 12 September 2017 at 20:00 UTC for 60 minutes Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):2000 UTC on the 14 Rubens Kuhl:I have to leave now... bye all., see some of you in WT4. Annebeth Lange, ccNSO:Congratulations, Avri! Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Congrats Avri! avri doria:thanks Kavouss Arasteh: Congradulations to Avri Hadia Elminiawi:congrats Avri Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Jeff - did you say Vice chair or Co-Chair? Kavouss Arasteh:jeff, what about you? Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):It seems that if the person who volunteers has been involved all along, that person could be Co-Chair. avri doria:it includes attedning all WT meetings and leadership meetings. Jim Prendergast:We definitley need a replacement co-chair - just for workload purposes Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):it woujld be good if Co-Chairs coulld actually split Work Track responsibilities. avri doria:we sort of do, but in reality, being informed and being able to back each other up mean we both attend most all. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Thanks Avri. I was thinking you updated each other in leadership meetings. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):lengthy and at as often the case over night for us in APAC :-) avri doria:we do, but updating is never as effective as being there or listening to the call. avri doria:also when one of us gets stuck, for whatever reason, the other jumps in. Robin Gross:we've been spoiled having the both of you as co-chairs. It's been an exemplary way to run these big pdps. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):I think Jeff is quite optimistic in his assesment of a timeframe of the RPM PDP (It's my opinion as one of the members of RPM PDP) Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Jeff - As discussed in Work Track 4, if our report affects RPMs in any way, then RPM group would have to deal with that before we could go to next round. That would be unfortuate I think - personal opinion. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):LOLl - "longest pole in the tent" avri doria:anne and old engineering term from my days as a engineering manager. avri doria:Anne an ... Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):interesting... Jim Prendergast:Can you tell us who from the GNSO COuncil stepped forward to serve as a WT5 leader? Jeff Neuman:From the Council -- no one Kristina Rosette:apologies in advance for background noise. am in Dulles and on using the app, but can't figure out how to mute myself Kavouss Arasteh: Jeff, The next meeting of WT3 will be on Sep 11 or SEP 12 Emily Barabas:The next WT3 call is Tuesday, 12 September 2017 at 20:00 UTC for 60 minutes Ken Stubbs:can't hear avri Vanda Scartezini:still difficult ti hear Kavouss Arasteh:I will be in Aeroplane at that time Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):no its not audible Avri Ken Stubbs:too much noise.. dont understand a thing she is saying ! Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Kavouss - maybe airplane will have wifi? Ken Stubbs:lots of background noise as well Julie Hedlund:Quiet and an echo too. Ken Stubbs:echos as well Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Really bad - cannot her Avri Hadia Elminiawi:can't hear avr Liz Brodzinski:Can't hear Avri at all Jim Prendergast:difficult to hear her Jonathan Robinson:Avri is not clear to hear. Sounds like she has two mics on Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):QUESTION: Did RPM group raise anything that we know affects our work? QUESTION Emily Barabas:For those who use Google Docs, this is the document we are using: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spreads... Michelle DeSmyter:not yet Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Thanks Jeff Steve Chan:Community Comment 1 is available here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_pag... Ken Stubbs:hear u perfect Ken Stubbs:brands ? Krishna Seeburn - Kris:I just hope every WT are good on their schedule and we can take up and discuss matters constructively...and get the work done.... Susan Payne:apologies to be joining late - conflicting call Donna Austin, Neustar:Agreed Kris. Krishna Seeburn - Kris:Next-Gen RDS PDP WG - have not yet agrreed on types of category.. is still on the table... wouldn't that be conflicting. Knowing that these may conflict or not conflicting... Vanda Scartezini:I beleive YEsS if anything can be changed further during this WG work Donna Austin, Neustar:I agree with supporting the existing categories. Jeff Neuman:@Kris - We have not been briefed on the work of RDS on this. But can you explain why that would be relevant for us? Annebeth Lange, ccNSO:I agree on continuing with categories, but they might have to be extended. Vanda Scartezini:but we have concensus that it is for further decision Krishna Seeburn - Kris:@ jeff this is still going through consensus....tomorrow we may know for sure.... Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):I think the existing categories are good but there are still big issues as to priority rounds etc. For example, should applications needing support from Applicant Support have a category and should there be any sort of priority for those? Kavouss Arasteh: I AM DISCONNECTED Michelle DeSmyter 2:The operator is dialing back to you Michelle DeSmyter 2:he is back on Kavouss Arasteh:I am disconnected but I fully support Alan that untill we decide to modify or supress categories we will continue to have categories Alan Greenberg:It is not clear to me whether Applican Support is a category, or an attribute of one or more categories. I tend to think the latter. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):support the existing, as a base set, Martin Sutton:Apologies, I had to reconnect. I agree with the existing list of categories. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):still subject to review as we progress Donna Austin, Neustar:Alan, I think applicant support could be a category for the purposes of discussion. Susan Payne:agree with keeping the current categorties Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Tru Alan - but if you decided to give any priority to those applications, you might need to create category.. avri doria:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mA_hTUhLhJSsfcmoQwREtUqxykZ5KfJffzJA... Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):It seems to me that if you create and Applicant Support category, you create an incentive for experienced and technically qualified registry service providers to work with such Applicants. Jeff Neuman:@Anne - Would any of the Applicants in the "Applicant Support Category" not also be in one of the other categories. In other words, they will either be an open registry, brand, geo, intergovernmental organization? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I think a "highly regulated" category would be well worth exploring Krishna Seeburn - Kris:@jeff ...these were the idea that may have to extend and state what kind of domain category would be into. But exactly what Next-Gen RDS PDP WG will come back and see what would go in there Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Jeff - we assume they could fit in any category but are distinguished by the need for Applicant Support. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Alan - Do you distinguish between Category 1 and Category 2 Safeguard advice? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):thus the term **highly ** regulated Christa Taylor:In WT1, potentially providing support to other applicants not in the Applicant Support Program was also brought up. For instance, a Community Application that may need some type of financial support Alan Greenberg:Was not trying to solve the problem, just noting that the wording on line A7 probably need to be adjusted. Kristina Rosette:dropping to board flight. will read transcript Jim Prendergast:Avri - I think the same call for objection should also be made on mailing list as not everyone is on this call. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Bon voyage Kristina Kavouss Arasteh:yes Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):it needs to be explored Kavouss Arasteh:No objection to explore them Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Agree with Cheryl Jeff Neuman:For the Validated TLDs, they are self described at: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.vtld.domains_&d=DwI... Krishna Seeburn - Kris:Yes i agree we need a definition to clearly understand them Jeff Neuman:Not all vTLDs are highly regulated Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):QUESTION: Is one a subset of the other? Is highly regulated a subset of validated? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):sensitive is different Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Did the GAC call Category 2 "sensitive"? Donna Austin, Neustar:And this is the primary challenge with categories: trying to define the different types of TLDs. Robin Gross:"regulated" seems to be tied to law in some way. "sensitive" is a grab bag or who knows what? so they are quite different. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):yes agree 👠Jeff separate Vanda Scartezini:+ 1 Donna Donna Austin, Neustar:I do not like the category of 'sensitive'. It has too many connotations. Kavouss Arasteh:Avri, I am unable to raise hand Jeff Neuman:I think the validated TLDs did a pretty good job at defining themselves Alan Greenberg:May I have an AOB? Related to the overall discussions we have had today. Jeff Neuman:at vtld.domains Greg Shatan:What would the consequences of being "sensitive" be? Jeff Neuman:I am not saying that need s to be a category, just saying they have a definintion Robin Gross:prone to rash? Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Greg - I though "sensitive" was a description of Category 2 GAC Advice, but not sure. Greg Shatan:Snowflake Alan Greenberg:ARobin, since rsh is typically an inflamation and sensitive TLDs often cause inflamed discussion, I tend to agree! Vanda Scartezini:sorry this is interesting discussion but I need to take a plane, my flight is being calling. read all afterwards. best to all thanks Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):safe travels Vanda Kavouss Arasteh:what we mean by unvalitdated gtld Donna Austin, Neustar:I also don't support validated. Just because a separate group has been formed doesn't mean a separate category needs to be formed. Some TLDs have a nexus requirement, but I don't know how that distinguishes the from validated. Kavouss Arasteh:Tks I agree that we need to have validated gtld Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):it looks like "special requirements TLDs" , but that could be a feature of many types of gTLDs (GEO limited to citizens some city , Community limitem to members of some assosiation, TLD limited to owners of special licenses e.t.c.) Jeff Neuman:Validated TLDs validate WHO the registrant is, not where they live or reside Michael Flemming:I think at this point we are merely discussing whether or not these have enough merit to be considered separately or together, not whether or not they will stand alone as a category at the current time, correct? Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Vlaidation includes dentist, doctor, attorney, etc. Designed to prevent shams and consumer fraud. Alan Greenberg:Time check. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Jeff, I am not sure that GEO can not have special field which only local citizens can provide Robin Gross:"sensitive" shouldn't be lumped in with highly regulated, which is a legal standard. Donna Austin, Neustar:I agree Robin. I do not support Jeff Neuman:Avri - Time check Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I agree with Robin... separate them Krishna Seeburn - Kris:@robin ...i agree they are not always same thing Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Bye all, need to drop for another call Jamie Baxter | dotgay:+1 Robin Susan Payne:@ Anne - GAC Category One : Consumer Protection, Sensitive Strings, and Regulated Markets Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):THanks Susan. I have recently looked at Category 1 and am familiar. not sure what is in Category 2. Michael Flemming:Category 2 is exclusive use / closed generics Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):time is against us Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):"Sensitive" - if e are talking cultural and religious issues, thats VERY complicated. Annebeth Lange, ccNSO:I have to leave for my flight. Donna Austin, Neustar:Indeed it is Anne. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Very different analysis between "highly regulated" on the one hand and "Cultural and religious" on the other hand. Hopefully the latter is NOT highly regulated - just the opposite. Jeff Neuman:All - we will send around a draft terms of reference in the next few weeks. Avri is discussing a response to the letters that we are receiving Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@AVri - Isn't there also "polling"? avri doria:yes there is polling, but it is not decsional Michael Flemming:We do send that out Michael Flemming:We send out a newsletter and meeting schedule Michael Flemming:Jeff has got it :) Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Sorry must go. thanks everyone. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):bye 👋 for now then, lots more to discuss clearly, but excellent work today. Robin Gross:Thanks', y'all, bye! Katrin Ohlmer, DOTZON:Thanks, all - bye! Krishna Seeburn - Kris:thanx bye