The call for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group is scheduled to take place on Monday, 24 October 2016 at 20:00 UTC for 60 minutes. 

**NOTE: This is an optional session and will be used as a planning meeting to prepare for the face-to-face session at ICANN57. 

13:00 PDT, 16:00 EDT, 21:00 London, 22:00 CEST

for other places see: http://tinyurl.com/zcb5cfz

Below, please find the proposed agenda

This meeting will be devoted to planning for the WG’s face-to-face session at ICANN57 and is therefore considered optional by the WG’s co-chairs. 

  1. Welcome/Review Agenda
  2. SOIs
  3. ICANN57 planning
  4. AOB

Mp3

Transcript  

AC Chat

Dial outs:   Amr Elsadr, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Kavouss Arasteh, Harold Arcos, 

Attendance   

Apologies:  Roger Carney, Amr Elsadr

On audio only:  Gg Levine

Notes/Actions:


New gTLD Subsequent Procedures face-to-face meeting at ICANN57: Thursday, 03 November 13:45-18:30.  See: https://icann572016.sched.org/event/8cxk/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-working-group-face-to-face-meeting.

Proposed ICANN57 Agenda – Draft, but subject to revision.

1.  Welcome and introductions

2.  Current Status (Overarching issues/CC1)

3.  Work Track based discussions

1.  Overarching issues/CC1:

  • Work Track 3 -- rounds vs. first-come, first-served process.  Everything else we had public discussion in Helsinki.  Don't need to go over the overall topics again.  Can stick to a status update, but won't go down any of the issues.
  • Ask liaisons to CCT-RT, RPMs, to provide a brief update.  Add as a new number 3 in the agenda.
  • Work Track based discussions.  Asked each WT to provide some teaser questions for community input.

2. Work Track (WT) based discussions

WT1: [reading from the draft agenda]

  • Question 1: Help spur the conversation on the Applicant Support Program.  Still looking for input.  Question 2: Update based on input from Donna Austin.  Question 2 should read: “From RSP Accreditation to Third-Party Certifier – What is the most effective method to meet the needs of RSPs, Registries and Registrars?”
  • Also include applicants as this is one of the problems we're trying to solve and consider how they might be affected.  Don't include if there isn't a specific concern.

WT2: [reading from the draft agenda]

  • Question: Do we need more reserved names re the IANA transition?  Such as PTI?
  • Question 2, WT2: Since it is different between RNWG and what was the result in the AGB - especially for geographical names - there is a need to see those two documents in connection.
  • Question: on our last call we were talking about top level and second level, for this question I think need to be clear what level we are talking about.
  • We also have 2 characters, single character IDNs, etc.  Also have IGOs. Red Cross, IOC, etc.
  • Questions re: COI / LOC - we would appreciate feedback from applicant's experiences/ problems.
  • CWG-UCTN is aiming to wrap up an Interim Report (aka Initial Report) around the end of this year.  A progress report of sorts is being prepared for ICANN57 discussions.

WT3: 1) Rounds vs. Continuous (first come, first served).  Impact on string contention.  2) Do we need an Independent Objector in future?

WT4: [reading from the draft agenda]

  • Currently in consultations with JAS and other Stakeholder Groups. 
  • Change Question #1 -- not application submission process, but the application evaluation process.

General question: In the unlikely circumstance that we don't have a very talkative audience does anyone have some backup questions?

  • If you are going to ask an open-ended question such as #1: you should create some rules about participating in order to manage the discussion, i.e., present you idea and why the change should be made - we will compile all the suggestions for discussion by the group.
  • Registry agreement categories -- in the overall issues, have more discussion in Hyderabad?  Handle in the appropriate track (WT2)?  Yes.
  • No labels