Day 1 - 29 August 2016 - 08:00–18:30 CEST | 06:00–16:30 UTC
Team: Drew Bagley, Stan Besen, Calvin Browne, Jordyn Buchanan, Dejan Djukic, Carlos Raul Gutierrez, Kaili Kan, Laureen Kapin, Gaonglalwe Mosweu, Megan Richards, Carlton Samuels, Waudo Siganga, Fabro Steibel, David Taylor, Jonathan Zuck
Staff: Theresa Swinehart, Margie Milam, Alice Jansen, Eleeza Agopian, Antonietta Mangiacotti, Pamela Smith, Brenda Brewer, Josh Baulch, Maya Saito
Guests: David Dickinson (Nielsen), Greg Rafert (The Analysis Group)
Observers: George Sadowsky, Ronald Schwoerzler, Martin Schlicksbier, Gaetano, Erich Schweighofer, Janos Böszörmenyi
Day 2 - 30 August 2016 - 08:00 –18:00 CEST | 06:00–16:00 UTC
Team: Drew Bagley, Stan Besen, Calvin Browne, Jordyn Buchanan, Dejan Djukic, Carlos Raul Gutierrez, Kaili Kan, Laureen Kapin, Gaonglalwe Mosweu, Megan Richards, Carlton Samuels, Waudo Siganga, Fabro Stiebel, David Taylor, Jonathan Zuck
Staff: Theresa Swinehart, Margie Milam, Alice Jansen, Eleeza Agopian, Pamela Smith, Brenda Brewer, Antonietta Mangiacotti, Brian Aitchison, Josh Baulch, Maya Saito
Guests: Greg Rafert (The Analysis Group)
Observers: George Sadowsky, Ronald Schwoerzler, Martin Schlicksbier, Vinzenz Huessler, Erich Schweighofer
Agenda & Details:
Observers are invited to follow the meeting remotely and/or in-person. Note: for details on how to observe plenary and break-out sessions, please refer to details in specific agenda items (click on the above to view the agenda). You are also invited to join the cocktail party - read here for more information
- ACTION ITEM: Send final data requests by September 14.
- ACTION ITEM - Staff to advise on volume of work and RT to prioritize.
- ACTION ITEM: Staff to refine program of calls.
- ACTION ITEM: Jordyn and Laureen to determine how the registrant survey phase 2 can help address questions/sub-questions (seek information/confirmation from David Dickinson). Provide David Dickinson with high-level and sub-questions.
- ACTION ITEM: David Dickinson and Team to write guidance document on how to find information to high-level/sub-questions. Staff to relay any follow-up questions from Review Team Members.
Application & Evaluation
- ACTION ITEM - Megan to make adjustments to sub-questions on How many string contention objections were raised and what was the outcome on new gTLD applications? In particular, what was the result of singular/plural string contentions? paper and share revised versions.
- ACTION ITEM - Staff to 1) check with the arbitration associations whether heard all the objections and whether compiled any summary reports on their decisions; 2) request the report if one exists, or a portion of it if they will release it, or summary of the data set.
- ACTION ITEM - Megan to identify strings which withdrew applications that received GAC Early Warning.
Safeguards & Trust
- ACTION ITEM: Drew to share Department of Commerce's Consumer Study with Team
- ACTION ITEM: Fabro and Calvin to consolidate compliance related data request. Important to check if available in existing resources.
- ACTION ITEM: Fabro, Carlton, Calvin to hold a call with compliance
- ACTION ITEM: Drew and Carlton to connect on anti-counterfeit
- ACTION ITEM: Drew to put together a definition of DNS abuse based on the safeguards
- ACTION ITEM: David to send additional sources of interest to staff for compilation on wiki page
- ACTION ITEM: Carlton to tie enforcement of specification 11 to risks intended to mitigate and to hold call with subteam
- ACTION ITEM: Carlton to categorize public interest commitments by type
Competition & Consumer Choice
- ACTION ITEM: Staff to work with Jordyn on double checking numbers of registrations in new gTLDs that were available in COM.
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group to calculate average wholesale prices for single-string vs. multi-string ROs
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group to add to Project 1 table, 6-month intervals, as well as a line on launched TLDs
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group to inquire about actual wholesale prices for legacy gTLDs
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group to determine if RR price dispersion in the new gTLDs significantly different than in the new gTLDs?
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group to compare TLD volumes to prices. Are larger TLDs (by registrations) cheaper?
- ACTION ITEM: Remove .BRANDS from TM string registration analysis table and include in a separate line. (AG)
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group to add to TM string list, in how many TLDs is a string registered, irrespective of who the registrant is? Also, add 90th, 95th and 99th percentiles. AG will provide histograms.
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group to add frequency distribution, other stats, plus number of registrations in TLDs registrar competition project
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group to determine if RR price dispersion in the new gTLDs significantly different than in the new gTLDs
- ACTION ITEM: Analysis Group Correlation between number of registrars and registrations per TLD. Exclude TLDs with less than 100 registrations
- ACTION ITEM: Jordyn to provide denominators for relevant TLDs in project 4.3. i.e. What % of all registrations in .BERLIN/residents of Berlin.
- ACTION ITEM: Add to Metric 2.6: Number of launched IDNs and number of launched total new gTLDs per each month in the table on the page.
- ACTION ITEM: Add to Metric 2.7: Replicate the chart for Oct. 2013 for all legacy gTLDs. For each legal regime, add in parenthetical the count of IDN tld’s contracted in that legal regime. Including description of WHOIS sample methodology.
- ACTION ITEM: Add to metric 2.11: Number of registrants in new gTLDs vs. number of registrants in legacy gTLDs. Do we have whois data for legacy gTLD registrations?