<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta name=Title content=""><meta name=Keywords content=""><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Calibri;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:Calibri;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Calibri;
color:windowtext;}
span.msoIns
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-style-name:"";
text-decoration:underline;
color:teal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Dear Sub Team Members,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 03 October. These high-level notes are designed to help Work Track Sub Team members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording. See the recording on the meetings page at: <a href="https://community.icann.org/x/tQ2bAw">https://community.icann.org/x/tQ2bAw</a>. Apologies for the late delivery – I knew I missed at least a few points and had to find time to review the recording.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Steve<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Times New Roman"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 1 - Overall Process/Support/Outreach Issue Tuesday, 04 October 2016 at 03:00 UTC</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Apologies: Laura Watkins, Katrin Ohlmer, Vanda Scartezini, Ashley Roberts</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>On audio only:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Agenda: </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> 1. Welcome</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>2. SOIs</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>3. Accreditation Discussion (continued)</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>4. Application Support</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>5. AOB</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Notes: </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>1. Accreditation Discussion (cont.)</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Why is it needed?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa - Most efficient way to mange through the process to TLD delegation. Avoids repeating the same process over and over again in evaluation, PDT, etc.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Jeff - Here were 7 reasons I gave on a previous email: </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> 1. Will lead to lower application fees for registry operators.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> 2. Greater initial choice in back end operators</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> 3. Quicker processing of applications if accreditation done in advance</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> 4. consistency In evaluation results for registry operator</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> 5. Quicker time to delegation as all pdt tests done in advance</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> 6. Increases portability of back end registry operators and simplifies Icann processes to change back end operators</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> 7. Could lessen costs and time for switching back end providers</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Donna - Applicant challenges to answering questions. Issues for RSPs going through PDP for every registry. RSP transition. Neustar is a large RSP, will likely have useful contributions to discussion. Can things be slowed down?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa - Middle ground - make some progress and can continue to bring up next meeting (and beyond), since there are multiple passes for each topic.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Jeff – Not making any final decisions on this meeting. Discussion began some time ago and will not end today. Not just about PDT. Also related to clarifying questions, inconsistencies in evaluation results, inability to streamline processes (e.g., applying same answer over many applications), more choices for RSPs, quicker delegation, increases portability. Should review the notes from GDD summit as well.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa - Oct 2009 document discussed accreditation (e.g. phase 4 documentation). Might provide clues to what should be included in testing for “certification”, how time and money can be saved. Also provides proposal for pricing/cost.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Donna - Only one solution has been considered. What other options are available? Could there be other methods to streamline, like only testing technical or PDT once for the same RSP? What are the technical requirements for ensuring DNS stability?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa – look at other options during next meeting.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Jeff - Should look at multiple solutions, though only one has been raised. Listed a number of advantages beyond just streamlining PDT. Suggested in GDD New gTLD Program Reviews.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa - Have the processes been identified that would be considered as a part of “accreditation”?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Avri - What about downsides? What benefits can be considered requirements versus nice to have?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Cecilia - logistics, circulate materials via email ahead of the meeting. Would promote discussions on the call and email. Should also in general conduct email conversations.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Jeff - GDD Summit - extensive discussions between front-end registries, registrars, and RSPs. Could help provide points for consideration, but need to include concerns from applicants and others.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>ACTION - collect benefits, disadvantages from these meetings and GDD Summit. May already be a part of deliberations Google Doc, but if not, can be added there.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>2. Applicant Support</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa - AM Global Report – Confusion, dense, not accessible, not enough information, limited categories for applying, concerns about total cost for running a registry, infrastructure, lack of outreach, lack of traditional media outreach. Consult slides for fuller information. Only 3 applied and only 1 applicant passed the criteria (.Kids). There was also support beyond financial – consultants that would provide expertise.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Michael – Good to look at criteria, process, what ASP really is. More background information would be good. Identify distinct issues.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Avri - Previously called Joint Applicant Support, went to the ICANN Board, became Applicant Support. Highly complicated, scored evaluation akin to CPE. Issues - late in the process, challenging questions/criteria, still required outlay of money ($47k), minimal outreach done. Non material assistance also provided, separately (pro bono). Penalty if not passed (cancellation). ALAC research - registry industry (registrars and ccTLDs) ground was not properly laid well in advance (e.g., years in advance).</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa – Community-based project, underserved languages, NGOs, not-for profit, local entrepreneur, etc. Each category has points. Social benefit, financial need, financial capability (ability to continue registry as going concern). Anything that should be included or added for future rounds? What benefits were extended beyond just application (e.g., first year)</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Sara - Pros and cons for this program? Primarily resellers in the underserved regions, maybe lack registry industry infrastructure.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Michael - Behind support for economically disadvantaged applicants. Need better outreach, more than just economic support, review the criteria – it’s not just based on region, process too complicated (process itself is not supportive itself). Benefit to brands?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa – Applying a string to your company, not just a .brand. Recommend reviewing AM Global Report</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Jeff - CCT-RT surveys - should check their work (the AM Global Report is actually the report mentioned by Jeff). Get thoughts from those who developed ASP. Good topic for ICANN57 since input from GAC/ALAC/etc. would be useful? Should applicants who do not pass AS criteria be automatically failed?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Avri - Part of JAS group, initially. Arguments around auto cancellation -> if you need the money, why would you move forward at full price? Could apply for additional funding in the meantime. Developing economy companies - population of possible registrants could be smaller.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Christa - AM Global report focused on universal acceptance, developing economies – how do you target them in the most effective way?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Sara - Does it make sense to integrate into capacity building efforts? Help drive the development of the criteria.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Donna - IDN launch - registrars didn't support Arabic. Not much interest at the time in second-level Arabic domains. Need to help evaluate long-term viability/sustainability of TLD.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>ACTION - seek JAS alumni to discuss</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Steven Chan</span></b><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"MS Mincho"'>
</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>Sr. Policy Manager<span style='font-family:"MS Mincho"'>
</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"MS Mincho"'>
</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>ICANN</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536<span style='font-family:"MS Mincho"'>
</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><a href="mailto:steve.chan@icann.org"><span style='color:blue'>steve.chan@icann.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>direct: +1.310.301.3886<span style='font-family:"MS Mincho"'>
</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>mobile: +1.310.339.4410<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>tel: +1.310.301.5800<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>fax: +1.310.823.8649<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>Find out more about the GNSO by taking our i<a href="applewebdata://310CAD3E-E244-4690-A938-C2655DD44BDE/learn.icann.org/courses/gnso"><span style='color:#57005A'>nteractive courses</span></a> and visiting the <a href="http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers"><span style='color:#57005A'>GNSO Newcomer pages</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>Follow @GNSO on Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO"><span style='color:#0000E3'>https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'>Follow the GNSO on Facebook: <a href="https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO"><span style='color:#0000E3'>https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><a href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/"><span style='color:#0000E3'>http://gnso.icann.org/en/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>