The next meeting for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 5 – Geographic Names at the Top Level will take place on Wednesday, 05 September 2018 at 05:00 UTC for 90 minutes. 

(Tuesday) 22:00 PDT, 01:00 EDT, 07:00 Paris CEST, 10:00 Karachi PKT, 14:00 Tokyo JST, 15:00 Melbourne AEST

For other times:



Adobe Connect Recording

GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar


Attendance & AC chat

Apologies: Sanna Sahlman, Katrin Ohlmer, Alfredo Calderon, Jim Prendergast, Kristina Rosette, Carlos Raul Gutierrez, Jorge Cancio, Robin Gross, Rosalía Morales, Alan Greenberg, Marita Moll


Notes/ Action Items

Action Items: 

ACTION ITEM 1: WT5 Co-Chairs will update the path to the Initial Report to indicate the timing for when the Working Document will be closed and the transition made to the Initial Report.


1. Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI updates: No SOI updates.

2. Non-AGB Terms:

-- On support/non-objection deadline: difficulty due to manpower/resources some countries miss the deadline.  What is the point of having this tacit agreement -- deadline of 60 days, etc. and then no agreement? (Proposal 3/3 -- Notice and Opportunity to Object)

-- Good practice that the process for any applicant should know who the applicant should engage with and the process for engaging the government representative, i.e., from the GAC.

-- Does this include compliance to international law? (Slide 6 -- Principles Discussed).

-- Often not clear which body in the government is following these issues.

-- Repository of Geographic Names:  Any support for that proposal?  Helpful for cultural significance.  Would serve as a useful basis for moving forward.  It seems we would need to decide the names that need to be protected.  What are we trying to protect?

-- List is the list of names that the government consider to be sensitive.  It could be a reference and an opportunity for different parties to get together for agreement and to avoid conflict.

-- Don't want to develop policy that could be in contravention of local laws.

-- Once we go into this non-AGB area, strings could have multiple meanings.  There could be a good intent on an applicant to use a string, but an applicant could use a list to discuss the intent with a local authority, but doesn't have to do so.  It could be a risk that the applicant could take.  Could be a practice rather than a policy.

-- List could be a useful reference point/guidance.  In any case it could be helpful.

-- Need to discuss whether there are risk in registering geographics as top level domains and where they come from.

-- Could just be a list with a "health advisory" to talk to the governments, but you are not obliged to do so.

-- Re: Advisory Panel -- what is the composition of the panel?  How are they elected?

-- From the first round.  We've come to the point of defining what is a geoname or not.

-- Encourage members to review the working document and add suggestions.

--  Last 2 bullets (slides 9and 10) further clarity is needed, to insert proviso that applicant provides evidence of actual notice or request to RGPA.

3. Work Plan and Initial Report:

-- Parked the discussion of consensus calls until after the Initial Report.

-- Next 3 meetings (05 Sept, 19 Sept, 03 Oct) --- Geo Names Requiring Government Support -- e.g., capital city names, city names used for a geographic purpose, etc

ACTION ITEM: Send to the list the Path to the Initial Report and note the timing for when the Working Document will be closed and the transition made to the Initial Report.

  • No labels