<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 http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Title" content="">
<meta name="Keywords" content="">
<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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:Calibri;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:Calibri;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:Calibri;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:Calibri;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle23
{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:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Dear Sub Team Members,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 19 January.
<i>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 chat room or the recording.</i> See the chat room and recording on the meetings pages at:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/Work+Track+4+Meetings">https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/Work+Track+4+Meetings</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Kind regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Emily<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Agenda: </span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">1. Welcome<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">2. SOIs<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">3. Full WG update<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">4. CC2 questions (<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iZBCVEAJPBYEDg7jLsMHKkNczR_b6-jH2Wl5eVH-WWM/edit">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iZBCVEAJPBYEDg7jLsMHKkNczR_b6-jH2Wl5eVH-WWM/edit#</a>)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">5. WT4 schedule and planning until ICANN 58<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">6. List of ongoing consensus calls and discussion themes<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">7. AOB<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Action Items:
<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">ACTION ITEM: Rubens will send revised schedule to the WT</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Notes: <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">2. SOIs<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- No updates<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">3. Full WG update<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Our next meeting is on Monday 30 January at 15:00 UTC<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Full group is creating drafting teams, calls will go out at the end of the week<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Drafting teams will focus on categorization, rounds vs. other models for subsequent rounds, discussions coming out of WT2<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- WTs are working on questions for CC2<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- The plan is for CC2 to go out mid- to late- February<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">4. CC2 questions<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Working document for CC2: <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iZBCVEAJPBYEDg7jLsMHKkNczR_b6-jH2Wl5eVH-WWM/edit">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iZBCVEAJPBYEDg7jLsMHKkNczR_b6-jH2Wl5eVH-WWM/edit#</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Regarding IDNs, we may want to consider adding a CC2 question about IDN variants<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Jeff Neuman suggested asking about experiences from those that have launched IDN TLDs and challenges they experienced<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Rubens was not sure if CC2 was the right place to ask for this input, but agreed it would be useful to have input on this issue<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">From the chat: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: For technical evaluation: Should the number of TLDs applied for, plus ones they currently run, be taken into consideration in the evaluation. If so, how<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Trang Nguyen: @Jeff, you are correct. Applications were evaluated on a standalone basis in the 2012 round<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Where can we factor in possible limitations in infrastructure? Rubens will propose text for a question on the list<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Should other factors be taken into account when someone applies for multiple vs. one TLD (evaluations, launch schedule, architecture, business continuity issues, etc)?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- The exact metrics and methods are not yet known, but the volume should be factored in<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Evaluation panel did raise this issue to ICANN<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- There was a reference in the AGB that applications needed to be evaluated on a standalone basis, which is why evaluations occurred this way<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">From the chat:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: Question for ICANN/Evaluators: Did the evaluators/panelists submit performance improvement reports or other comments on what improvements could be made for subsequent procedures?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: Was there any post mortem process?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: If so, can we see those?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Trang Nguyen: We had debriefs with the evaluation panels and they provided comments and suggestions, which we took into account when drafting the PIRR.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: PIRR?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Trang Nguyen: Program Implementation Review Report<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: Is it possible to see the original comments?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Trang Nguyen: They were provided to ICANN as confidential documents, not for external consumption.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: Why confidential?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Trang Nguyen: We could check with them to see if they would have any issues with releasing them.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: I can understand redacted portions related to individual applications......but it would be great to see their comments. It may help us to revise questions that were asked of applicants<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Trang Nguyen: Their comments/suggestions were largely consistent with ICANN's observations as reflected in the PIRR, but we could take an action to ask them whether we can share their reports.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">5. WT4 schedule and planning until ICANN 58<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Current plan: focus next call on IDN and UA<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Target: produce CC2 questions in WTs by the end of January, full WG will consider all CC2 questions and send out for public comment in mid-February<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- No objections expressed regarding this timeline<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">6. List of ongoing consensus calls and discussion themes<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- "Financial Evaluation must be performed in aggregation of a registry family"<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Question to consider: should the financial evaluation be different for certain types of applications?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Trang Nguyen (staff): The financial panel recognized two types of financial models 1. closed model (self supporting)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">2. open model (meant to generate revenue). They looked at the applications differently and different thresholds were applied.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">From the chat:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Phil Buckingham: Q should there be a separate financial template for each "type" of business model <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: @Trang. That makes total sense.....We should document that formally and put it into the guidebook<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Martin Sutton: That would be helpful to have more detail Trang - can that be shared?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- If the group can get additional information about the existing models of evaluation, this could be put out for comment as part of CC2.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- We are not in the business of evaluating business models. We need to be flexible about the questions we ask in order to ensure sustainability.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Trang: We can't assume that model of the applicant will be the business model forever. Therefore we need to look at the broader picture of the application. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">From the chat: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Martin Sutton: @Trang - good point, but that could be built in to a transition process where checks have to be completed before they switch over<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Some of these issues are discussed in the Program Implementation Review Report<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- One model discussed including a second level in a yearly membership, example of different ways of looking at business model<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- For future consideration: change of features post-contract - what are the change processes? Do the processes we have now address all the possible changes that could occur?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">From the chat:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: @Avri - Changes are right now through RSEP process and that is currently beyond the scope of this PDP<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: Other than accounting for changes in the contracting process, I am not sure we should be delving into how future changes are done. We can recommend a separate PDP for that, but if we go down that path now, we will never finish.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Steve Chan: I think it has been discussed in the context of other topics (e.g., different TLD types), but there is not a dedicated topic related to the subject.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Jeff Neuman: Plus, that has applicability to existing registries as well as for those for future ones<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- This WG may want to go deeper into the types of issues that should be considered in evaluations<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- In the last round, change in business model sometimes occurred during application process or after signing registry agreement. This caused challenges for ICANN staff. Maybe it would be less of an issue if the rounds were shorter. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">- Jeff: We should probably deal with changes in the application process but not after the contracting phase. We could recommend a separate PDP to address changes later in the process.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">-If application processing is faster in future rounds, there may be fewer changes to the model during the application process.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">From the chat: <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): re change of mode<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Phil Buckingham:<b> </b>Agree Jeff- cant backtrack . <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Martin Sutton: Agree with Jeff - recommendation for separate PDP to progress this, as it is a post-application change<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): mode=model yes Jeff agree<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:Calibri;color:black">From: </span>
</b><span style="font-family:Calibri;color:black"><gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Terri Agnew <terri.agnew@icann.org><br>
<b>Date: </b>Thursday 19 January 2017 at 17:37<br>
<b>To: </b>"gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4@icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4@icann.org><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4] Recording, Attendance & AC Chat from New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team Track 4 IDNs/Technical & Operations call<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">Dear All,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">Please find the attendance and recording of the call attached to this email and the AC Chat below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track
4 – IDNs/Technical & Operations held on </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Thursday, 19 January 2017
<span style="color:black">at </span>15<span style="color:black">:00 UTC.</span></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">The recordings of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><a href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">Mailing list archives: </span><a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#3B73AF;background:white">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Agenda
<span style="color:black">Wiki page: </span></span><a href="https://community.icann.org/x/wLPDAw"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">https://community.icann.org/x/wLPDAw</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">Thank you.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">Kind regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Terri</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">-------------------------------</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><b><u><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black">Adobe Connect chat transcript for
</span></u></b><b><u><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">19 January 2017</span></u></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Terri Agnew:Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 4 – IDNs/Technical & Operations onThursday, 19 January 2017 at 15:00 UTC.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Terri Agnew:agenda wiki page: <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_wLPDAw&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=iGt6RqY5_BnkQ3kyCICg3SIy3p6PtF9rUbFNHZt1bNc&s=j-r-o0X14-F4zrnABqfuZ0_QVZ189dQGaoxQlSXjrqU&e">
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_wLPDAw&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=iGt6RqY5_BnkQ3kyCICg3SIy3p6PtF9rUbFNHZt1bNc&s=j-r-o0X14-F4zrnABqfuZ0_QVZ189dQGaoxQlSXjrqU&e</a>=
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Dietmar Lenden - Valideus Ltd:Thanks Terri<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Terri Agnew:@Jeff audio quality is good at this time<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Terri Agnew:30 January New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group 15:00 UTC<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Terri Agnew:All hands have been cleared<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:Not sure how to phrase this, but I would love to hear about experiences from those that have launched IDN TLDs<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:What challenges they have had<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:what can be done for improvement<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Alan Greenberg:I am not seeing anything in the centre pod.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Alan Greenberg:oops - now back!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Martin Sutton:need to amend the financial question to quote financial<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Martin Sutton:its done<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Martin Sutton:thx<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:For technical evaluation: Should the number of TLDs applied for, plus ones they currently run, be taken into consideration in the evaluation. If so, how<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Trang Nguyen:@Jeff, you are correct. Applications were evaluated on a standalone basis in the 2012 round.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:Question for ICANN/Evaluators:Did the evaluators/panelists submit performance improvement reports or other comments on what improvements could be made for subsequent procedures?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:Was there any post mordem process?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:If so, can we see those?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Trang Nguyen:We had debriefs with the evaluation panels and they provided comments and suggestions, which we took into account when drafting the PIRR.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:PIRR?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Trang Nguyen:Program Implementation Review Report<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:Is it possible to see the original comments?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Trang Nguyen:They were provided to ICANN as confidential documents, not for external consumption.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:Why confidential?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Trang Nguyen:We could check with them to see if they would have any issues with releasing them.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:I can understand redacted portions related to individual applications......but it would be great to see their comments. It may help us to revise questions that were asked of applicants<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Trang Nguyen:Their comments/suggestions were largely consistent with ICANN's observations as reflected in the PIRR, but we could take an action to ask them whether we can share their reports.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> avri doria:Trang, that would be good to check if you could. Thanks<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Phil Buckingham:which bullets points do you wish to discuss .
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Phil Buckingham:Q should there be a separate financial template for each "type" of business model .<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:@Trang. That makes total sense.....We should document that formally and put it into the guidebook<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Martin Sutton:That would be helpful to have more detail Trang - can that be shared?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Martin Sutton:Should there also be some differentiation between self-funded registries where they are the only registrant, i.e. impact on registrants is not relevant?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Phil Buckingham:@ Trang , does ICANN have the points scored for each question by application by type of business model ( ie closed / open / IDNs ) . Then possibly we can start to identify the problem questions
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Martin Sutton:@Trang - good point, but that could be built in to a transition process where checks have to be completed before they switch over<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Phil Buckingham:@ trang- when an applicant reaches a set number of DUMs ? I thought it was 50K that would trigger a change from closed model to an open one ?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:@Trang - good questions<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:@Avri - correct. That is being implemented by some TLDs now<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:@Avri - Changes are right now through RSEP process and that is currently beyond the scope of this PDP<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Phil Buckingham:Exactly Avri - does a change of application status mean new financial evaluation / due diligence
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I am not aware of any of our WT s looking at that either Avri so yes we need to catch them
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:Other than accounting for changes in the contracting process, I am not sure we should be delving into how future changes are done. We can recommend a separate PDP for that, but if we go down that path now, we will never
finish.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Steve Chan:I think it has been discussed in the context of other topics (e.g., different TLD types), but there is not a dedicated topic related to the subject.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Jeff Neuman:Plus, that has applicability to existing registries as well as for those for future ones<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Phil Buckingham:+1 Steve <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):re change of mode<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Phil Buckingham:Agree Jeff- cant backtrack . <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Martin Sutton:Agree with Jeff - recommendation for separate PDP to progress this, as it is a post-application change<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):mode=model yes Jeff agree<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Terri Agnew:next call: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 4 – IDNs/Technical & Operations will take place on Thursday, 09 February 2017 at 20:00 UTC.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Trang Nguyen:Sorry, i will try to provide answers to questions aked in the chat via the mail list.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Dietmar Lenden - Valideus Ltd:thanks Ruben and the rest<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> avri doria:thanks<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Trang Nguyen:Thanks, all!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>