Webinar just concluded on the next round that the ASP Program
Marika and Lars, Although Chris Mondini seemed to say that training for potential applicants re risks and costs of running a TLD is outside ICANN's area of responsibility and somehow outside of the GGP guidance on outreach, the fact is that only ICANN is primarily responsible for financial and technical evaluations and these are big hurdles in the process. (Sorry I don't have Chris' email.) Recommendation 17.2 contemplates training and counselors. This should not be postponed and laid on the private sector only. At the very least, potential ASP candidates should be alerted to requirements for Financial Evaluation, RSP Evaluation (or working with a pre-approved RSP), and technical evaluations before they take all the time and trouble to apply for the program. Again, ICANN should not be risking a bunch of withdrawn ASP evaluations once these organizations understand the complexities. I don't see why ICANN cannot prepare a webinar that would cover these topics (as well as eligibility) and link that webinar to the invitation to apply for the program that opens November 19. Please don't skip this important step. I am a big fan of ASP and do not want to see it fail in any respect, including withdrawn applications for ASP qualification. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
Hi Anne, Thanks for your note and for your patience on our response. As you know, the Next Round team is still working on the details of financial and technical evaluations for the gTLD Program for the AGB. As such, we do not yet have communications or capacity development materials available on those just yet--but it is part of what the readiness team is working towards. As you can imagine, the ASP team is busy preparing for launch on 19 November and also attending the ICANN81 meeting. The team does not currently have bandwidth to conduct another webinar if we do not want to jeopardize the ASP launch. But the ASP team has been working closely with the readiness team to develop three resources for ASP applicants which you may have seen posted in the recent blog: https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/icann-resources-available-to-prepare-... For RO costs, we are making sure that communication materials include references to the additional costs and efforts that are involved in running a registry so that interested parties make sure they inform themselves appropriately. Perhaps communicating the ongoing costs and operational considerations of running a Registry might be something to raise with the RySG as they are best positioned to advise interested applicants on what it takes? Lastly, ASP applicants are required to tell ICANN if they qualify but then withdraw their application so that we can open up additional slots. Telling prospective ASP applicants how challenging it is to apply for a gTLD and run an RO during the awareness and understanding phase of the applicant journey may be more discouraging than inviting--especially for newcomers curious to learn more about the space. Further to the blog, the ASP team will be presenting more information on capacity development work underway--both for prospective ASP applicants and prospective gTLD applicants. Thanks again for your comments and suggestions. And as always, we're happy to discuss further. Best regards, Marika From: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, 30 October 2024 at 20:43 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Lars HOFFMANN <lars.hoffmann@icann.org> Cc: Kristy Buckley <kristy.buckley@icann.org>, Samantha Mancia <samantha.mancia@icann.org>, "subpro-irt-asp@icann.org" <subpro-irt-asp@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Webinar just concluded on the next round that the ASP Program Marika and Lars, Although Chris Mondini seemed to say that training for potential applicants re risks and costs of running a TLD is outside ICANN's area of responsibility and somehow outside of the GGP guidance on outreach, the fact is that only ICANN is primarily responsible for financial and technical evaluations and these are big hurdles in the process. (Sorry I don't have Chris' email.) Recommendation 17.2 contemplates training and counselors. This should not be postponed and laid on the private sector only. At the very least, potential ASP candidates should be alerted to requirements for Financial Evaluation, RSP Evaluation (or working with a pre-approved RSP), and technical evaluations before they take all the time and trouble to apply for the program. Again, ICANN should not be risking a bunch of withdrawn ASP evaluations once these organizations understand the complexities. I don't see why ICANN cannot prepare a webinar that would cover these topics (as well as eligibility) and link that webinar to the invitation to apply for the program that opens November 19. Please don't skip this important step. I am a big fan of ASP and do not want to see it fail in any respect, including withdrawn applications for ASP qualification. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com>
Hi Marika, Many thanks for your comprehensive reply. I do think more thought must be given as to how the private sector can become involved in assisting new ASP applicants. We are giving out mixed messages here because we are so concerned about gaming. We say on the one hand - no affiliation with existing registries - then we say on the other hand that we can't supply training and info on risks and costs and how to run a registry but that the RySG members should do that. It would be helpful to provide a model scenario as to how a registry could get involved in the ASP program without running afoul of the gaming concern that relates to ICANN maintaining its public benefit status. Exactly what can an RO actually do to help an ASP applicant? How much involvement is permitted and in what ways? And how can ROs be recruited to help make the ASP program a success? Mentoring program? ICANN hires Councilors who know the business but are no longer in it? Many thanks for thinking about this. Again, just trying to make sure we don't get a bunch of withdrawn ASP applications when the task looms as "too daunting" for new entrants on ASP. My recollection is that 17.2 contemplated the hiring of Counselors to help educate? Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 6:06 AM Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Anne,
Thanks for your note and for your patience on our response. As you know, the Next Round team is still working on the details of financial and technical evaluations for the gTLD Program for the AGB. As such, we do not yet have communications or capacity development materials available on those just yet--but it is part of what the readiness team is working towards.
As you can imagine, the ASP team is busy preparing for launch on 19 November and also attending the ICANN81 meeting. The team does not currently have bandwidth to conduct another webinar if we do not want to jeopardize the ASP launch. But the ASP team has been working closely with the readiness team to develop three resources for ASP applicants which you may have seen posted in the recent blog: https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/icann-resources-available-to-prepare-...
For RO costs, we are making sure that communication materials include references to the additional costs and efforts that are involved in running a registry so that interested parties make sure they inform themselves appropriately. Perhaps communicating the ongoing costs and operational considerations of running a Registry might be something to raise with the RySG as they are best positioned to advise interested applicants on what it takes?
Lastly, ASP applicants are required to tell ICANN if they qualify but then withdraw their application so that we can open up additional slots. Telling prospective ASP applicants how challenging it is to apply for a gTLD and run an RO during the awareness and understanding phase of the applicant journey may be more discouraging than inviting--especially for newcomers curious to learn more about the space. Further to the blog, the ASP team will be presenting more information on capacity development work underway--both for prospective ASP applicants and prospective gTLD applicants.
Thanks again for your comments and suggestions. And as always, we're happy to discuss further.
Best regards,
Marika
*From: *Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> *Date: *Wednesday, 30 October 2024 at 20:43 *To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, Lars HOFFMANN < lars.hoffmann@icann.org> *Cc: *Kristy Buckley <kristy.buckley@icann.org>, Samantha Mancia < samantha.mancia@icann.org>, "subpro-irt-asp@icann.org" < subpro-irt-asp@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Webinar just concluded on the next round that the ASP Program
Marika and Lars,
Although Chris Mondini seemed to say that training for potential applicants re risks and costs of running a TLD is outside ICANN's area of responsibility and somehow outside of the GGP guidance on outreach, the fact is that only ICANN is primarily responsible for financial and technical evaluations and these are big hurdles in the process. (Sorry I don't have Chris' email.) Recommendation 17.2 contemplates training and counselors. This should not be postponed and laid on the private sector only.
At the very least, potential ASP candidates should be alerted to requirements for Financial Evaluation, RSP Evaluation (or working with a pre-approved RSP), and technical evaluations before they take all the time and trouble to apply for the program. Again, ICANN should not be risking a bunch of withdrawn ASP evaluations once these organizations understand the complexities.
I don't see why ICANN cannot prepare a webinar that would cover these topics (as well as eligibility) and link that webinar to the invitation to apply for the program that opens November 19. Please don't skip this important step. I am a big fan of ASP and do not want to see it fail in any respect, including withdrawn applications for ASP qualification.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese
GNSO Councilor
NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026
anneicanngnso@gmail.com
participants (2)
-
Anne ICANN -
Marika Konings