Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


  • Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice: Did the implementation meet or discourage these goals?
    • Note that per Section 9.3 of the Affirmation of Commitments, there is to be a community driven review of the New gTLD Program’s impact on Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice, taking into account the recommended metrics as identified by the Implementation Advisory Group for Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice (IAG-CCT).
  • Applicant Guidebook (AGB): Is the AGB the right implementation of the GNSO recommendations? If so, how can it be improved to ensure that it meets the needs of multiple audiences (e.g., applicants, those monitoring the policy implementation, registry service providers, escrow providers, etc.)
  • Clarity of Application Process: How can the application process avoid developing processes on an as-needed basis (e.g., clarifying question process, change request process, customer support, etc.)
  • Accreditation Programs: As there appears to be a limited set of technical service and Escrow providers, would the program benefit from an accreditation program for third party service providers? If so, would this simplify the application process with a set of pre-qualified providers to choose from? Are there other impacts that an accreditation program may have on the application process?
  • Systems: How can the systems used to support the New gTLD Program, such as TAS, Centralized Zone Data Service, Portal, etc. be made more robust, user friendly, and better  integrated?
  • Application Fees: Evaluate accuracy of cost estimates and/or review the methodology to develop the cost model, while still adhering to the principle of cost recovery. Examine how payment processing can be improved.
  • Communications: Examine access to and content within knowledge base as well as communication methods between ICANN and the community.
  • Application Queuing: Review whether first come first served guidance remains relevant and if not, whether another mechanism is more appropriate.
  • Application Submission Period: Is three months the proper amount of time? Is the concept of a fixed period of time for accepting applications the right approach.
  • Support for Applicants From Developing Countries: Evaluate effectiveness of Applicant Support program to assess if the criteria were properly designed, outreach sufficient, monetary support sufficient, etc. In particular, was there enough outreach in developing economies to 1) contribute to the design and nature of the process and 2) to ensure awareness of the opportunity afforded?
  • Variable Fees: Should the New gTLD application fee be variable based on such factors as application type (e.g., open or closed registries), multiple identical applications, or other factor?
  • Misc - Ways to provide comment and role of public comments 


Work Track 1 Issue Areas Working Document: