[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus Call on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.

Sun Aug 12 22:41:59 UTC 2018

Carlos,

I don’t think that this WT5 should create a new “silo” of “uniform TLDs” – in this case the 3166alpha3 based gTLDs. But ESPECIALLY this WT should have no mandate in the business plan – e.g. “cheap”. I assume you suggest these ISO 3166 3-letter based gTLDs should have a low price to the registrar? May I ask what the rationale for such thought is? Since almost 14 years (when Dirk and me started .berlin in November 2004) my mantra NUMBER ONE is: “No underpriced domain registrations”. These are the cause of all evil. ESPECIALLY for a new namespace. All “valuable” generic namespace within an underpriced gTLD WILL be grabbed by “investors” – and that’s the kiss of death to any new namespace. 

You will have your reasons to ask for an “inexpensive price to the registrar” (probably the thought was that low income people can have cheap domains) – others have reasons to demand higher (“responsible”)  prices. Pricing shouldn’t be in the realm of ICANN.

Otherwise: The “uniformly” idea voiced by you. Understandable to a degree. But completely impractical. Some countries will want to use it for the Government ONLY (like the U.S. Government does with .gov). Others will grant access to only certain parties. And some might open it up to the world. Again: That is not for ICANN to decide.

So my question here:
Seemingly we are NOT opening up ISO 3166 Alpha 3 and country names for the NEXT round, right? We merely make a note (like the last AGB did) that this category  needs to be worked on? Why then would we already TODAY create pre-conditions? 
Let’s simply state that: We were tasked to solve this issue – but we delegate that work to some future policy making body as we do not feel that such decision were in our competence. 

Alexander

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Raul Gutierrez
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2018 4:57 PM
To: Rosalía Morales <rosalia.morales at nic.cr>; Javier Rua <javrua at gmail.com>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus Call on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.

Rosalía

The ccNSO tried to move on and couldn't. The CWG ccNSO GNSO also got stuck exactly at this juncture (reservation of ISO 3l list). And now this WT5 draft is suggesting exactly the same.

I'm sorry, but I see no reasonable rationale yet to move on other than lack of consensus.

I want to leave for the record that in my view, the ISO 3L could be a dream of a list for purely public interest that could be "uniformerly", I.e. under a single set of PICs, used for non for profit, geographic only, expandable, cheap way for geonames.

And I think it would be valuable to spend MORE time on the PICs and the delegation conditions for such a fine list.

Have a nice weekend

On August 10, 2018 4:17:30 PM CST, "Rosalía Morales" <rosalia.morales at nic.cr <mailto:rosalia.morales at nic.cr> > wrote:

Carlos,

I’m not questioning your position. Everyone has their own right to their opinions. My opinion is that we should try to move on.

Best,

Rosalía 

Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef> 

  _____  

From: Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se <mailto:carlosraul at gutierrez.se> >
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2018 3:57:27 PM
To: Rosalía Morales; Javier Rua
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org> 
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus Call on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call. 

Rosalía 

I submitted my position on 3 letter codes delegation in written form well before San Juan.

My position goes back to the CWG on the same issue years ago, also on record.

I can always live with a minority position here. 

On August 10, 2018 10:27:56 AM CST, "Rosalía Morales" <rosalia.morales at nic.cr <mailto:rosalia.morales at nic.cr> > wrote: 

Dear All, 

We discussed the issue on 3 letter codes for months and had come to a consensus in our face to face meeting in San Juan. I strongly believe we should stick to our previous agreements and move on.

Best,

Rosalía

On Aug 9, 2018, at 5:52 PM, Javier Rua <javrua at gmail.com <mailto:javrua at gmail.com> > wrote:

Carlos, 

I see you support keeping the current status of two letter-letter country/territory codes.  I think that’s in line with general WT thinking and I feel has broad support.

On the other hand, like some other WT members you mention preference for a future policy that’s a bit more liberal or “pro delegation” in regards 3 letter codes that are geonames, limiting the possible applicants to -governmental authorities, ccTLD managers and “public interest entities”.

Could you expand on these “public interest entities”? Could you suggest language in the pertinent “Recommendation” for WT consideration?

Thx

Javier Rúa-Jovet 

+1-787-396-6511

twitter: @javrua

skype: javier.rua1

https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua 

On Aug 8, 2018, at 8:50 PM, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se <mailto:carlosraul at gutierrez.se> > wrote:

Dear Annebeth

I fully support Recommendation #1 AS IS

no changes there

I don't support the recommendation on ISO 3 letter (forgot the number). ISO 3 letter codes should be delegated to Govs, ccTLD managers or any other interested PUBLIC INTEREST entities

Don't know if this answers your question

---

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez

carlosraul at gutierrez.se <mailto:carlosraul at gutierrez.se> 

+506 8837 7176

Aparatado 1571-1000

COSTA RICA

El 2018-08-08 14:48, Annebeth Lange escribió:

Hi Carlos 

Could I ask you for one clarification? If we open up for some 2-letter/letter combinations in the GNSO process, they will automatically be gTLDs. You don't think that will disturb the distinction we have had from the beginning that 2-characters are ccTLDs and 3 or more gTLDs?

Kind regards,

Annebeth

Annebeth B Lange

Special Adviser International Policy

UNINETT Norid AS

Phone: +47 959 11 559

Mail: annebeth.lange at norid.no <mailto:annebeth.lange at norid.no> 

8. aug. 2018 kl. 22:43 skrev Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se <mailto:carlosraul at gutierrez.se> >:

My comments to today's call:

1. "The ICANN Community may want to consider whether a future process should be established or determine if, when, and how specific interested parties, such as relevant government authorities, may apply for country and territory names" This paragraph is the only sensible part of a forward-looking recommendation and should/could be redrafted. I wonder if it could be enhanced, or if the only way to go is deletion as CW suggested.   A shorter more concise version? A more "liberal" version? How about: "ICANN may consider applications by specific interested parties, such as relevant authorities, of strings that are not current or future countries or territories."  Ps: The text in Recommendation 1 "reserving ALL two character letter letter" combinations-  can be enhanced.  I wonder if it's truly ALL, or if the potential for future countries and potential combinations is really much less broad? Could that be qualified somehow? I can't think of a future .xx or .ññ country or territory and maybe we could tweak the language to open this a bit and garner broad community support to move forward.

2. Other than recommendation #1, I object strongly the text to "keep geo names from the delegation" in any other recommedation, unless a clear rationale is added to the recommendation

3. I hope no draft goes out before a substantial non-AGB names discussion has taken place, including to geographic related, cultural, linguistic and other social  elements, ,like Apache Nation

Best regards

---

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez

carlosraul at gutierrez.se <mailto:carlosraul at gutierrez.se> 

+506 8837 7176

Aparatado 1571-1000

COSTA RICA

El 2018-08-08 05:09, Emily Barabas escribió:

Dear Work Track members,

Please find attached suggested revisions to the draft recommendations shared yesterday. Please note that this revised text includes clarifications and typo corrections only. Feedback on some of the more substantive issues will be discussed further on today's call.

Kind regards,

Emily

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> > on behalf of Martin Sutton <martin at brandregistrygroup.org <mailto:martin at brandregistrygroup.org> >
Date: Monday, 6 August 2018 at 14:45
To: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org> " <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org> >
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus Call on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.

Dear Work Track members,

Please find below the proposed agenda for the WT5 call on Wednesday 8 August at 13:00 UTC:

1. Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI Updates
2. Review of Consensus Call Process and Work Plan
3. Consensus Call on Country and Territory Names
4. Wrap Up - Non-AGB Terms
5. AOB

On our upcoming call, the leadership team will introduce a work plan aimed at wrapping up WT5's work and delivering an Initial Report by the end of September. In maintaining this timeline, the leadership is seeking to ensure that Work Track 5 inputs can be effectively integrated into the work of the broader New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group in time for delivery of the PDP's Final Report. A copy of the work plan is attached.

As outlined in the work plan, the leadership team will be holding a series of consensus calls on potential recommendations to include in WT5's Initial Report. These will be introduced in clusters, with the first set of recommendations focusing on country and territory names. The draft recommendations, which will be discussed on Wednesday, are attached. Work Track members are encouraged to review and provide feedback on these draft recommendations prior to the call on Wednesday. The leadership team will officially open the consensus call on this topic following Wednesday's call. For more information on the consensus call process that will be followed, please see the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, Section 3.6: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_annex-2D1-2Dgnso-2Dwg-2Dguidelines-2D18jun18-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=NVtIpaem-VqCNPYPOoZhv9ofczsIO-e3-mM3UoaoTMA&s=g15pYjxotpxtjftphXYKDMOR0bso7mS5i2CXTIVfcww&e=> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-18jun18-en.pdf [gnso.icann.org].

If you need a dial out for the upcoming call or would like to send an apology, please email  <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org> gnso-secs at icann.org.

Kind regards,

WT5 Co-Leads

Annebeth Lange

Javier Rua

Olga Cavalli

Martin Sutton

The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited.

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5

<Draft Recommendations - country and territory names - v4.pdf>

<Draft Recommendations - country and territory names - v4.docx>

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20180813/562d013d/attachment-0001.html>