<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif">OK ... So I take a break away from connectivity to deal with other Non ICANN (yes they exist!) matters after our earlier WT call, and so much has happened on the list!</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif">Clearly (well in my view at least ;-) we still have plenty to discuss regarding the Registry Services question, and as Jeff mentioned in his earlier email => "...<span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px">we absolutely need to make sure that [all] proposal[s] is [/are] considered. .... ..... ..... There may be other proposals out there and I strongly encourage those to come forward." </span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px">So in keeping with that spirit of exploration let's keep on discussing and proposing options on this, and over the next day or two we will put together some sort of matrix from our meetings and these list discussions to ensure we capture as much as possible both in opinions, options and variable support for the alternatives with a view to then fully discussing matters further at our next or the following meeting.</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font face="Calibri, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:14.6667px">Thank you all for your valuable contributions so far mind we hope that more WT members doing so over the coming week or so.</span></font></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><br><a href="http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr" style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-size:14px;vertical-align:baseline;color:rgb(58,169,233);text-decoration:none;line-height:18.200000762939453px" target="_blank"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:baseline;border-spacing:0px"><tbody style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:baseline"><tr style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:baseline"><td align="left" valign="top" style="padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;vertical-align:top;line-height:1"><div style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;vertical-align:baseline;line-height:1"><font color="#674ea7"><i><font face="comic sans ms, sans-serif"><font size="6">C</font><font size="4">heryl </font><font size="6">L</font><font size="4">angdon-</font><font size="6">O</font></font></i><font size="4"><i><font face="comic sans ms, sans-serif">rr ... </font></i><span style="font-family:proxima-nova-1,Proxima-Nova,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-style:inherit">(CLO)</span></font></font></div><div style="font-family:proxima-nova-1,Proxima-Nova,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-style:inherit;margin:3px 0px 0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-size:12px;vertical-align:baseline;color:rgb(43,130,173)"><br></div><div style="font-family:proxima-nova-1,Proxima-Nova,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-style:inherit;margin:3px 0px 0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-size:12px;vertical-align:baseline;color:rgb(43,130,173)">about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr</div></td></tr><tr style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:baseline"><td align="left" valign="top" style="padding:8px 0px 0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:top;line-height:1"><div style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:baseline;text-align:right;background-color:rgb(197,208,224);height:4px"><img src="http://d13pix9kaak6wt.cloudfront.net/signature/colorbar.png" alt="Cheryl Langdon-Orr on about.me" width="88" height="4" style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:baseline;float:right;display:block"></div></td></tr><tr style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:baseline"><td style="padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-style:inherit;font-size:0px;font-family:inherit;vertical-align:baseline;height:20px"> </td></tr></tbody></table></a><div> </div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On 1 September 2017 at 14:59, Rubens Kuhl <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br" target="_blank">rubensk@nic.br</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><span class=""><blockquote type="cite"><div class="m_-4962561957436891285WordSection1" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">You have presented a proposal and we absolutely need to make sure that proposal is considered. Rubens has presented his strawperson, you have presented yours. Is there a way to merge the two? There may be other proposals out there and I strongly encourage those to come forward.</span></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span>Actually, I presented a first straw person in the meeting before this one, and it was to strike Q23 altogether... that was the only one that only come out that I could claim copyright to. The one presented at the start of the call was already modified due to WT members input, Anne included, and the one I sent after call was based on what was discussed in the call... so it is already at the 3rd generation with many thumbprints, and there is no reason not to change further. It's not final until it is sent to Council labeled "final report". </div><div><br></div><div><span class=""><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="m_-4962561957436891285WordSection1" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u><u></u></span></span></div><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">On the issue of whether applicants that propose new services should pay to have these new services reviewed, this is a complex issues. On the one hand, as you state, it may be a disincentive to propose new innovative services. On the other hand, reviewing new services does come with a cost for evaluation. New services may require a different skill set of reviewers that reviewing the existing services. Reviewing new services may require a more thorough security analysis, competition analysis, etc. than existing services (which are already reviewed and proven). So not charging those applicants that propose new services for the evaluation of those new services results in those that do not propose new types of registry services subsidizing those that do. From a policy perspective, that may be ok, but it is a policy decision we should all make.</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span>I'm all for the SubPro WG making this decision, but I'm unsure that it belongs to WT4, since application fees looks more like WT1 to me. </div><div><span class=""><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="m_-4962561957436891285WordSection1" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></span></div><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">FYI, the existing Registry Agreements do require registries to pay the costs of proposing new registry services if a Technical Panel has to be called in to review the new services. I believe there may be a cap of $50,000, but I could be confusing that with the 2012 Round costs.</span></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span>That applied to 2012, and even there might not be a real cap but only an indication of value, since some fees charged during the process differed from the guidebook. On RSTEPs that occurred after the new gTLD program, there was only one I'm aware of, PIR's .ong/.ngo bundling, which cost was much higher than USD 50k. </div><span class=""><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div class="m_-4962561957436891285WordSection1" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u><u></u></span></span></div><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Thanks for keeping the discussion going and I hope you do feel free expressing your ideas/proposals going forward. If not, please bring that to my attention (or to Avri’s attention if you are more comfortable with that). I am trying my best to be neutral and encourage discussion, but I am not infallible. <span class="m_-4962561957436891285Apple-converted-space"> </span><u></u><u></u></span></span></div><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman',serif"><span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></span></div></div></blockquote><br></div></span><div>Likewise, WT4 do have one co-chair that was not mentioned as discouraging discussion, Cheryl, if someone feels more comfortable raising an issue. </div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Rubens</div><div><br></div></font></span></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>