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, 07 August 2017 at 20:00 UTC. Attendance of the calls is also posted on the agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/wAAhB MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-07aug17-en.mp3 Adobe Connect Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p25mnmq00e8/ 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/wAAhB Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 07 August 2017 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG call Monday, 07 August 2017 at 20:00 UTC Michelle DeSmyter:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_w... Annebeth Lange:Good evening from Norway! Jeff Neuman:Good afternoon from DC Katrin Ohlmer, DOTZON:Good evening! Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Supposedly I have joined the call but I cannot hear anything. Jeff Neuman:@Anne - did you hear me > Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Yes thanks Jeff Jeff Neuman:ok...2 minute warning Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):hello all! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):hi all Vanda Scartezini:hi everyone. Bruna Santos:Hello, everyone! Kavouss Arasteh:pls kindly speak more slowly Kavouss Arasteh:Dear All, Heather Forrest:I'm having trouble with computer speakers and can't hear so will re-start and be back very shortly Kavouss Arasteh: pls kindly speak slowly Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):example of .wine? Emily Barabas:The recording from the most recent WT3 call is available here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_t... Susan Payne:dotAmazon involved the IO too Avri Heather Forrest:I'm back and sound is working now - apologies Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):distorted sound Vanda Scartezini:too close to the mic Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):COMMENT: RE next steps we reviewed in Work Track 4, Rubens asked what additional advice we thought would be necessary. I expressed the opinion that I would need to see the proposed draft Framework for Name Collision in order to understand whether or not we needed additional technical advice. Emily Barabas:The upcoming call for WT1 will be 3:00 UTC tomorrow, Tuesday 8 August Vanda Scartezini:difficult to hear Hadia Elminiawi:can not hear ypu phil Aslam G Mohamed:Hi All. My apologies for getting in a bit late. It's bad weather here in New York. Aslam Mohamed. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):COMMENT: In Work Track 4, name collisions, two issues relate to who will make the judgment as to whether a string applied for represents a low, medium, or high risk string. Second question relates to when ICANN.org may grant a discretionary waiver in relation to the 90 day controlled interruption period. We may need technical advice on these two points. Susan Payne:can you confirm what will be discussed on 10 August - it wasn't very clear Emily Barabas:The two "matrix" documents related the reserved names are available here -- Top-Level Reserved Names: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spreads... Reserved Names: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spreads... Emily Barabas:sorry, the links published a bit oddly Susan Payne:thanks - sound was a bit muffled for me Emily Barabas:Top-Level Reserved Names: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spreads... Emily Barabas:Second-Level Reserved Names: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spreads... Tom Dale:Jeff, the GAC Chair is on leave. Can you please send to me so I can forward to the GAC leadership group. Steve Chan:Tom, thank you for letting us know. We will forward the message to you for distribution to the GAC leadership group. Mark Carvell GAC UK rep:GAC Vice Chairs of whom I'm one will advise Thomas on his return from leave. Jim Prendergast:notes answerd my question - thanks Kurt Pritz:Paste the link in here? Steve Chan:Kurt, here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_documen... Annebeth Lange:It will be important for WT5 that the number of members attending are balanced between the different stakeholdergroups Kurt Pritz:Gracçias Steve Chan:And agenda item 5 is here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_documen... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):indeed Annabeth Kavouss Arasteh:Jeff, are we discussing the title"requirement Considered *? Heather Forrest:@Kavouss, I believe Jeff is discussing the heading 'Application Submission Periods' Vanda Scartezini:raounds is the option I beleive Alexander Schubert:ICANN will provide us with an annual rate of application processing. E.g.: 2,500 applications per year. Annebeth Lange:Do we expect that when the next round opens, the AGB (or whatever it will be called) then will be the same for later rounds? Vanda Scartezini:we did a survey in this region about the intention to apply Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Alexander, as I understand it is more like 1000 applications per year now Alexander Schubert:If we get 5,000 applications then for 2 years ICANN won't be able to process any new application submissions anyway. So we have those years to make adjustments. Kavouss Arasteh:"Remedial Period " or "Adjustment Period " instead of " review Period " Alexander Schubert:So number of applications divided by ICANN's processing speed determines the earliest start of the next round! Phil Buckingham: @ alexander - it is a question of what delegation rate the root zone can take . 10000 per year possible ? Kavouss Arasteh:Jeff , That seems an option to establish "Stading Panel is Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Alexander@ I think some ICANN letters might give a hint on a next round time, like https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system... Kavouss Arasteh:Kavouss Arasteh: Jeff , That seems an option to establish "Stading Panel Kurt Pritz:old Vanda Scartezini: i beleive 1.5 years after the end of the first round looks great Alexander Schubert:Why allowing application submissions when knowing that ICANN can't process any for X years? Let's pile up demand - why avoiding competition? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Alexander, I think it might be an interest rate or something, for example 26k applications give 25 years for the last thousand Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):so finances are secured and it gives some stability Kurt Pritz:I think if you paid someone 185K per application, they could be processed "infinitely" quickly Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):I hope we do not see auctions for queue Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):numbers Susan Payne:well I think there are some things we are discussing which could assist on the evaluation rate - pre-certifying RSPs for example would speed up subsequent evaluation Paul McGrady:+1 Susan. Why evaluate and revaluate and revaluate and revaluate and revaluate the same people endlessly. Alexander Schubert:Precisely. And some here want to reduce the effective application cost to just $50k - then we easily get a 5 figure application roster. Jeff Neuman:I am trying to put a fence around the unknowns Phil Buckingham:i dont think the number of evaluators will be a limiting factor . This can be scaled up . accordingly Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I suppose many would agree with not having money held Alan Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):WT4 has asked for clarification on that Alan Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):the 1k "limit" I mean Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Also companies bleeding money during the time in the queue, and it is more than 185 for the single application (in case a single TLD applicand) Vanda Scartezini:for me limiting 1,000 for each round and considering time we had last round ( around 1.5 year) keep the same lenght looks viable Alexander Schubert:Maybe we simply double the application fee next round - and depending on demand only lower it if ICANN can process fast enough. Trang Nguyen:2.1.4.2 of the PIRR has some information regarding evaluation timeframe. Per the timeline provided for in the AGB, the estimated timeline for processing 1930 applications is 25 months. ICANN completed IE in 18 months, that's with prioritization taking place late in the process (December of 2012) and with additional time (outreach process) for applicants to respond to CQs. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Vanda, the last time it was 2000 and not 1000 Jeff Neuman:Ultimately, I would love to be able to give ICANN a list of the types of variables for them to model out. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):digital archery attempt of the queueing Vanda Scartezini:yes - i am considering limiting for 1,000 just to have a number and time enough to not expend too much paying large groups to evaluation Steve Chan:To Trang's comment, PIRR stands for Program Implementation Review Report and is available here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_anno... Gg Levine (NABP):GAC Advice may be an additional variable Robin Gross:There will always be "glitches" ;-) Jeff Neuman:hopefully less minor glitches in the future Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Vanda, given the 7-8 years between rounds (what we see now), 1000 might not be enough Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Jeff, also we need to hope not to have major ones too Trang Nguyen:ICANN's criteria for vendor selection in the 2012 round was that the firms had to be global with the ability to scale because we did not know what the volume would be. Trang Nguyen:All 3 firms engaged for financial and technical evaluation had the ability to scale. Vanda Scartezini:maxim, i am proposing 1.5 years between rounds - and for this new round I am not betting on more than 1,000 Aslam G Mohamed:To scale up ICANN can also consider outsourcing? Donna Austin, Neustar:Trang: will ICANN be starting from scratch in terms of building a replacement to TAS or is something else in train? Robin Gross:That makes sense, Jeff. Kavouss Arasteh:Dear Secretariat, pls capture my thoughts in summary Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):as I understand the current model - applicants pay and then , over time , the plan is revealed (or created) Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):in mathimatics attempts to optimize model with too many independent variables usually have no real solutions Trang Nguyen:@Donna, TAS was retired after Initial Evaluation of the 2012 round and it's not expected that we will resurrect it. Donna Austin, Neustar:@Trang, so you intend to build a new system? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Most probably new GDD portal have applicants part over the time Phil Buckingham:is this a top down or bottom up. approach . Ultimately it is down to an ICANN budget allocated ., which needs to flexed Trang Nguyen:@Donna, yes a new tool to accept applications will be developed. Emily Barabas:Drafting team sign up: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_documen... Christa Taylor:Perhaps the type of application and the difference in processing time should be considered and whether it impacts the ceiling volume i.e. if a brand only takes 75% of the time a generic application takes than it might change the equation Jeff Neuman:we hear you avri Michelle DeSmyter:trying to locate the line Hadia Elminiawi:we hear the beep too Paul McGrady:Yay! Aslam G Mohamed:Flood Warning ⚠️?! Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):So a new application submission system could have its own issues. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):hopefully it is beta tested unlike the old one Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):before the applicants pay Kavouss Arasteh:Additional interval to be added to the initial basic period or interval period should calculated with the aid of a variable curve or variable lines with some logical mathematic process interval ,rather than we decide arbitrarily to add additional time with arbitrarily selected application number Paul McGrady:I guess I don't understand what the issue is? This document, whether or not drafted by Staff, seems to flow directly from GNSO Principle A on new gTLDs. "New generic top-level domains (gTLDs) must be introduced in an orderly, timely and predictable way." Plus, we are being given a chance to review it (on this call). Steve Chan:There is a footnote in the document to the existing framework that ICANN uses now to implement Consensus Policies: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_policy_im... Kurt Pritz:Following Paul's comment, the current policy is: "All applicants for a new gTLD registry should therefore be evaluated against transparent and predictable criteria, fully available to the applicants prior to the initiation of the process. Normally, therefore, no subsequent additional selection criteria should be used in the selection process." What edits are we proposing? Jeff Neuman:Take an example.......How to process applications for purposes of queueing.......In 2012, it was Digital Archery......well, we found out that implementation of that was flawed. It took MONTHS to figure out a new queuing mechanism. Hopefully having this framework will result in having a MUCH smaller delay if something like that comes up again Jeff Neuman:(Ignore the example), but focus on the principle Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@Paul - issues arising during implementation was the whole point of Policy and Implementation Working Group work where participants from all stakeholders was open. Who exactly is working on the revisions to the Framework? Kavouss Arasteh:Predictability IS A COMPLEX PROCESS WHICH DEPENDS ON MANY FACTORS ON WHICH WE MAY NOT HAVE ALL INPUTS Kavouss Arasteh:Sorry for CAP , I repeat, Kavouss Arasteh:Predictability is a complex process which depends on many factors on which we may not have all inputs Steve Chan:Thanks Trang, I had raised by head to try and draw that distinction. Kavouss Arasteh:We need to separate the policy development and its implementation Jeff Neuman:"Implementation of Policy" is different than implementation of the program Kurt Pritz:@ Jeff - Can you explain? Kavouss Arasteh:Policy and implementation are two different things Kavouss Arasteh:How we could implement the policy? Aslam G Mohamed:bye Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):COMMENT: Jeff, I see your point but you may recall there was huge disagreement in 2012 over what was policy and what was implementation. Similarly we could easily have folks disagreeing in the next round as to whether something is implementation of policy or operational implementation. You go back down the same hole. Vanda Scartezini:thanks you Avri Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):COMMENT: Reminder that the whole issue in 2012 was that ICANN CEO and staff considered items implementation whereas GNSO considered them policy. You actually authored the letter to the Board telling them they had to come back to the GNSO. So why would your new category of "operational implementation" be any different? Phil Buckingham:29 th for Europeans 03.00 UTC Vanda Scartezini:thank you all. leaving now Emily Barabas:upcoming schedule of topics to be considered in WTs: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spreads... Sara Bockey:thanks all Robin Gross:Thanks Avri and Jeff. Bye all! Alexander Schubert:Bye...... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):good call everyonr bye 👋 the time being Katrin Ohlmer, DOTZON:thanks and bye! Hadia Elminiawi:thanks jeff and all Hadia Elminiawi:bye