Page History
...
The work given to this community working group (WG) has presented enormous challenges to its membership, most of whom care deeply about reducing obstacles for proposed TLD applications by or supporting communities in developing economic environments.
Given the eventual target audience of this document and our desire to have it presented and read unedited, the authors have attempted to adopt a simple format while maintaining accuracy and consistency with previous consensus. The WG has determined that a detailed description of the process flow, metrics and procedures for determining whether an application meets the criteria and how this application will be dealt with is required.
Part 1: WHY provide applicant support?
Part 2: WHEN should support be provided?
Part 3: WHO qualifies for support? and HOW do we evaluate the applications?
Part 4: WHAT do qualified applicants get?
Part 5: Interaction with the AG including cessation and repayment of support Relationship between this program and the ICANN new gTLD Applicant Guidebook (AG)
The Working Group has determined, at this time, that best possible process to provide support for such applications is to be done through a process that is parallel to, and not a replacement of, the ICANN Applicant Guidebook. Thus, even after the Guidebook is formally approved, this WG can continue its work to refine those components of its mandate which remain unresolved. It is important that the AG make mention of this program and refer interested potential applicants to it, however it is not the WG's intention to otherwise affect the existing application process. To qualify for support applicants may be required to demonstrate that they meet this program's criteria on financial need and public interest; however such activity is intended to supplement, not replace, existing mechanisms in the AG.
There was no consensus within the WG whether this process should be-
- fully, partially or not confidential;
- funded by ICANN with an initial lumpsum amount; or
- evaluated and co-ordinated by an internal or external ICANN entity;
and these points will be evaluated and considered further by the WG.
(see Part 5 for the suggested interaction between this process and the AG)
Part 1 - Why provide new applicant support?
During the International ICANN Meeting in Nairobi in March 2010, ICANNs Board recognized the importance of an inclusive New gTLD Program and the concern expressed by ICANN stakeholders regarding the financial and technical obstacles faced by applicants from developing economies seeking to offer new gTLDs. The Board issued a Resolution (#20) at requesting ICANN stakeholders…
"...to develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs."
Part 1 - Why provide new applicant support?
During the International ICANN Meeting in Nairobi in March 2010, ICANNs Board recognized the importance of an inclusive New gTLD Program and the concern expressed by ICANN stakeholders regarding the financial and technical obstacles faced by applicants from developing economies seeking to offer new gTLDs. The Board issued a Resolution (#20) at requesting ICANN stakeholders…
"...to develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs."
In April 2010 the GNSO and ALAC co-chartered a Joint Working Group on Applicant Support, also known as the “JAS WG” (and referred hereafter as the WG), in direct response to this Board resolution. The main In April 2010 the GNSO and ALAC co-chartered a Joint Working Group on Applicant Support, also known as the “JAS WG” (and referred hereafter as the WG), in direct response to this Board resolution. The main objective of this WG is to develop a sustainable approach to providing support to Applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLD Registries.
...
3.3 Notes on ineligible criteria
Applications by governments or government-owned entities
By consensus of the WG, purely Governmental or para-statal applicants have been listed as not entitled to receive support. However, at the ICANN San Francisco meeting the WG received a request from the GAC to consider including Government applications from Developing Countries for support. The WG will work to obtain a mutually acceptable definition and criteria to fit Government applications with the GAC WG, but recognizes the difficulty in measuring a government’s “need” and concern of the appropriateness of offering support for one government over another if resources are limited. The GAC WG has offered to review the JAS criteria and provide its recommendations on a formulation of a solution for possible support to Developing Country Government applications.
...
- Logistical assistance
- Technical help
- legal and filing support
- Awareness/outreach efforts including efforts to ensure more people in underserved markets are aware of the new gTLD program and what they can do to participate in it
- Deferred requirement of DNSSEC
- Relaxed vertical integration regulations
4.3 Support from third parties facilitated by ICANN
4.3.1 - Pool of collected resources and assistance
- Translation support
- Logistical help
- technical support
- Awareness and outreach
- Infrastructure for providing IPv6 compatibility
- DNSSEC consulting
- IDN implementation support
- Possible technical setups
4.3.2 - Directory and referral service only for eligible applicants
- Facilitating contacts with granting agencies and foundations
- ICANN would facilitate but cannot commit to providing
4.4 Financial support distributed by an ICANN originated (Development) fund
For any funding provided through ICANN by a benefactor that does not wish to administer that funding itself, these funds would be allocated by a specially dedicated committee. The Working Group recommends the creation of a development fund directed at new gTLD applicants who were determined as meeting the criteria established for support.
4.4.1 - Support Program Development function
The working group recommends that ICANN establishes a Support Program Development function with an initial goal of securing a targeted commitment for an ICANN based development fund.
4.5 Financial support Distributed by External Funding Agencies
There is consensus in the group that external funding agencies would make grants according to their own requirements and goals. ICANN would only provide those agencies with applicant information of those who met the criteria established for support.
Part 5 - Interaction with the AG including cessation and repayment of support
- program and what they can do to participate in it
- Deferred requirement of DNSSEC
- Relaxed vertical integration regulations
4.3 Support from third parties facilitated by ICANN
4.3.1 - Pool of collected resources and assistance
- Translation support
- Logistical help
- technical support
- Awareness and outreach
- Infrastructure for providing IPv6 compatibility
- DNSSEC consulting
- IDN implementation support
- Possible technical setups
4.3.2 - Directory and referral service only for eligible applicants
- Facilitating contacts with granting agencies and foundations
- ICANN would facilitate but cannot commit to providing
4.4 Financial support distributed by an ICANN originated (Development) fund
For any funding provided through ICANN by a benefactor that does not wish to administer that funding itself, these funds would be allocated by a specially dedicated committee. The Working Group recommends the creation of a development fund directed at new gTLD applicants who were determined as meeting the criteria established for support.
4.4.1 - Support Program Development function
The working group recommends that ICANN establishes a Support Program Development function with an initial goal of securing a targeted commitment for an ICANN based development fund.
4.5 Financial support Distributed by External Funding Agencies
There is consensus in the group that external funding agencies would make grants according to their own requirements and goals. ICANN would only provide those agencies with applicant information of those who met the criteria established for support.
Part 5 - Relationship between this program and the ICANN new gTLD Applicant Guidebook (AG)
The WG has determined, at this time, that best possible process to provide support for such applications is to be done through a process that is parallel to, and not a replacement of, the ICANN Applicant Guidebook. Thus, even after the Guidebook is formally approved, this WG can continue its work to refine those components of its mandate which remain unresolved. It is important that the AG make mention of this program and refer interested potential applicants to it, however it is not the WG's intention to otherwise affect the existing application process. To qualify for support applicants may be required to demonstrate that they meet this program's criteria on financial need and public interest; however such activity is intended to supplement, not replace, existing mechanisms in the AG.
There was no consensus within the WG whether this process should be-
- fully, partially or not confidential;
- funded by ICANN with an initial lumpsum amount; or
- evaluated and co-ordinated by an internal or external ICANN entity;
and these points will be evaluated and considered further by the WG.
The Working Group has determined that a detailed description of the process flow, metrics and procedures for determining whether an application meets the criteria and how this application will be dealt with is required. The following broad steps, did not obtain thorough evaluation or obtain full consensus by the WG, but are suggested as a starting point to this process and will be further refined by the WG based on the Parts 1 to 4 above. The Note the process is meant to be to be in parallel with the AG-
...
