The next meeting for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 5 – Geographic Names at the Top Level will take place on Wednesday, 15 May 2019 at 20:00 UTC for 90 minutes.
13:00 PDT, 16:00 EDT, 22:00 Paris CEST, (Thursday) 01:00 Karachi PKT, (Thursday) 05:00 Tokyo JST, (Thursday) 06:00 Melbourne AEST
For other times: https://tinyurl.com/y4pfd25h
PROPOSED AGENDA
- Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI Updates
- Continue Review of Public Comments -- Options/Proposals:
- Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f.2.3.2 for context) – Start at Question 19, Variant 2
- Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f2.3.3 for context)
- Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f.2.3.4 for context)
- Options/Proposals: terms not included in the 2012 Applicant Guidebook (see deliberations section f.2.4 for context)
- AOB
Background Documents
For agenda item 2, please review the Google document at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WKSC_pPBviCnbHxW171ZIp4CzuhQXRCV1NR2ruagrxs/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com].
RECORDINGS
PARTICIPATION
Notes/ Action Items
Actions:
Staff to go back through the tabs and make sure any BRG/RrSG mis-assignments are fixed
Notes:
- Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): Annebeth has changed her work title, but will still be on WT5 doing the same work.
2. Review of Public Comments
Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f.2.3.2 for context)
Question 19, Variant 2:
Line 40 -- ALAC -- Agreement/Divergence
Lines 41-54: Divergence
Question 19, Variant 3:
Line 56 -- Dotzon GmbH -- Agreement
Line 57 -- ALAC -- Agreement/Divergence
Lines 58-70: Divergence
Question 20:
Lines 72-78: Agreement
Line 79 -- United States -- Agreement/Concerns
Line 80 -- RySG -- Agreement/Divergence
Lines 81-89: Divergence
Question 21:
Lines 91-98: Agreement
Line 99 -- Agreement/Divergence
Line 100 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 101-108: Divergence
Question 22:
Lines 110-113: Agreement
Line 114 -- ALAC -- Agreement/Divergence
Lines 115-125: Divergence
Lines 126-7: No comment
Question 23:
Lines 129-134: Agreement
Line 135 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 136-146: Divergence
Question 24:
Lines 148-154: Agreement
Line 155 -- ALAC -- Agreement/Divergence
Lines 156-165: Divergence
Question 25:
Lines 167-169: Agreement
Line 170 -- dotBerlin et al. -- Agreement (partially -- first part)
Line 171 -- Dotzon GmbH -- Agreement (partially - second part) Divergence (with first part)
Line 172 -- IPC -- Agreement (partially - first part) Divergence (with second part)
Line 173 -- ALAC -- Agreement/Divergence
Line 174 -- RyST -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 175-183: Divergence
Question 26:
Lines 185-198: Agreement
Lines 199-201: Divergence
Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f2.3.3 for context)
Question 27:
Lines 6-13: Agreement
Line 14 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 15-23: Divergence
Question 28:
Lines 25-27: Agreement
Line 28 -- BRG -- Agreement (qualified)
Line 29 -- IPC -- Agreement/Divergence
Line 30 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 31-42: Divergence
Question 29:
Line 44 -- BRG -- Agreement (qualified)
Lines 45-49: Agreement
Line 50 -- Group of Registries -- Agreement (qualified)
Line 51 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 52-61: Divergence
Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f.2.3.4 for context)
Question 30:
Lines 6-13: Agreement
Line 14 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 15-23: Divergence
Question 31:
Lines 25-26: Agreement (qualified)
Lines 27-28: Agreement
Line 29 -- IPC -- Change to Divergence
Line 30 -- RyST -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 31-42: Divergence
Question 32:
Lines 44-50: Agreement (some qualified)
Line 51 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified)/Divergence
Lines 52-61: Divergence
Options/Proposals: terms not included in the 2012 Applicant Guidebook (see deliberations section f.2.4 for context)
Line 4 -- Christopher Wilkinson -- Concerns
Question 33:
Lines 5-14: Agreement (some qualified)
Line 15 -- ALAC -- Change to Divergence
Lines 16-22: Divergence
Lines 23 - RySG -- Doesn’t appear to address the proposal
Question 34:
Lines 25-30: Agreement
Line 31 -- DotBERLIN -- Agreement/Concerns
Line 32 -- dotzon GmbH -- Agreement
Lines 33 -- RySG -- Agreement/Concerns/Divergence
Line 34-35: Concerns/Divergence
Lines 36-40: Divergence
Line 41 -- Portuguese Govt.
Question 35:
Lines 43-49: Agreement
Lines 50-51: Concerns/Divergence
Lines 52-59: Divergence
Line 60 -- RySG. -- no position
Question 36:
Lines 62-71: Agreement (IPC line 72 is qualified)
Line 72 -- NCSG -- Agreement/Concerns -- change to Agreement, qualified
Line 73 -- RrSG -- Concerns/Divergence -- This is really divergence with explanation
Lines 74-77: Divergence
Line 78 -- RySG -- no position
- There are a few cases where a group has given the rationale has been given followed by divergence. Sometimes it is categorized as concerns followed by divergence, but perhaps it should just be divergence with a rationale provided. There are a number of cases on tab F 2.4). Comments from BRG (line 50) and RrSG (line 51) may have this problem. Lines 34 (suggestion to change to divergence) and 35 are also cited.
- Staff will pull out these items for the summary document regardless, the highlighting helps staff condense the material. It is not a problem from staff perspective to change these to divergence if the group prefers.
Question 37:
Lines 80-86: Agreement
Line 87 -- ALAC -- Agreement/Concerns - should be Agreement (Qualified) + Concerns
Lines 88-96: Divergence
Line 97 -- RySG -- no position
Question 38:
Lines 99-107: Agreement
Lines 108-115: Divergence
Line 116 -- RySG -- no position
AOB
- Leadership Team is thinking about how to use the time at ICANN65
- There will likely be two sessions on the first day
- Feedback is welcome on the agenda for these sessions
- The time may be used to summarize points of agreement and focus on difficult issues
- Additional substantive comment from one member -- geographic names must be protected for future generations. This protection should not be limited to specific lists.