[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [Ext] Re: Notes & Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Work Track 5 - 08 May 2019

Julie Hedlund julie.hedlund at icann.org
Thu May 9 13:07:46 UTC 2019


Many thanks Justine.  This is very helpful.

Kind regards,
Julie

From: Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 3:05 AM
To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Notes & Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Work Track 5 - 08 May 2019

Hi Julie,

I am responding to the action item assigned to me in the notes below regarding the ALAC's comment to Q19 Variant 1, Line 26 in the f.2.3.2 worksheet.  I had already posted my confirmation -- please refer to the chat transcript for the call<https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-05-08+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP+Work+Track+5?preview=/105387527/109481220/Attendance%20%26%20chat%20WT5%2008%20May%202019%20.pdf> at the last page time-checked 01:52:56, which I now extract and reproduce as follows:-

"01:52:56 Justine Chew: f.2.3.2 Line 26/3, I confirm ALAC's comment is captured completely and yes, there was both support and opposition to Proposal 19 Variant 1 but we only provided explanation to the opposition."

Many thanks,
Justine Chew
ALAC liaison for Subsequent Procedures
-----


On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 00:55, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org>> wrote:

Dear Work Track 5 members,



Please see below the action items and notes from the Work Track 5 meeting today, 08 May 2019.  These high-level notes are designed to help WT5 members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat, which will be posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-05-08+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP+Work+Track+5.



Kind regards,

Julie

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director



Notes and Action Items:

Actions:

Country and territory names (see deliberations section f.2.2.2 for context), Question 13:
ACTION ITEM 1: Line 48 -- BRG -- change to “neither agrees nor disagrees”.
ACTION ITEM 2: Line 49 -- CITC -- change to “Divergence”.

Country and territory names (see deliberations section f.2.2.7 for context)
Question 15:
ACTION ITEM 3: Line 6 -- Government of Spain, etc. -- Change to “Concerns/New Idea”
ACTION ITEM 4: Line 16 -- IPC -- Change to “Agreement (Qualified)”

Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f.2.3.1 for context)
ACTION ITEM 5: Staff will review the section and add explanatory notes as necessary to suggest if there is support for more or fewer restrictions.
Question 17:
ACTION ITEM 6: Line 8 -- IPC -- Change to “Agreement (Qualified)”
ACTION ITEM 7: Line 10 -- Group of Registries -- change to “Agreement (Qualified)”
ACTION ITEM 8: Line 13 -- BRG -- Change to “Agreement (Qualified)”
Question 18:
ACTION ITEM 9: Line 33 -- INTA -- Delete the explanatory note and move to the column for notes.

Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f.2.3.2 for context)
Question 19:
ACTION ITEM Line 9 -- ALAC -- Change to “Agreement (qualified)”

Question 19, Variant 1 -- Supplemental Protections: Line 26 -- ALAC -- Agreement, Divergence
ACTION ITEM 10: Justine will check the comment.

Notes:

1. Updates to Statements of Interest (SOI): Nick Wenben-Smith had an update

2. Continue Review of Public Comments -- Options/Proposals:

Country and territory names (see deliberations section f.2.2.2 for context) – start at line 8

Question 11:
Lines 8-15: Divergence, agreeing that strings should generally be made available.
Lines 16-25: Divergence

Question 12:
Line 27 -- RrSG -- Agreement
Lines 28-31: Agreement (qualified) and Divergence, strings should be made generally available
Lines 32-35: Divergence, strings should be made generally available
Lines 36-46: Divergence

Question 13:
Line 48 -- BRG -- [comment: this could be construed as support]
-- change to neither agrees nor disagrees with the idea
Line 49 -- CITC -- [comment: this could be construed as qualified support]
-- change to “Divergence”
Line 50 -- RySG -- Concerns, Divergence
Lines 51-55 -- Divergence, strings should be made generally available
Lines 56-66 -- Divergence
-- Concerns about the use of the term “divergence” -- characterize as “non-support”?
-- “Divergence” is the term we have been using.
Line 67 -- Group of registries -- [comment: proposal is unclear]

Country and territory names (see deliberations section f.2.2.6 for context)

Question 14:
Lines 6-10: Agreement
Lines 11-25: Divergence
Line 26: Government of Spain, etc. -- no position

Country and territory names (see deliberations section f.2.2.7 for context)

Question 15:
Lines 6 -- Government of Spain, etc. -- Agreement
-- Doesn’t agree that it should only be the country, so this should be changed to Concerns, New Idea
Lines 7-17: Agreement
-- IPC comment on line 16 -- seems that the IPC is not agreeing with any evidence that the country can provide; change to “Agreement (Qualified)”.
Line 18 -- BRG -- Concerns
Line 19 -- RySG -- Concerns (needs clarity)
Lines 20-24: Divergence
Line 25 -- Portuguese Government -- no position

Question 16:
Lines 27-36: Agreement
Line 37 -- RySG -- Agreement, Divergence -- The status quo did not allow for translations in this category
Line 38 -- United States -- New Idea, Concerns -- Seems to support adding translations, but only official languages of the UN and country
Lines 39-46: Divergence

Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f.2.3.1 for context)

ACTION: Review the section and add explanatory notes where there is general agreement or divergence to suggest if there is support or not for more or fewer restrictions.

Question 17:
Lines 6-11: Agreement
Line 8 -- IPC -- Agreement
-- Change to “Agreement (Qualified)”
Line 10 -- Group of Registries -- Agreement
-- This proposal is not the first choice -- change to “Agreement (Qualified)”
Line 12 -- United States -- Agreement (Qualified)
Line 13 -- BRG -- Agreement (preference, though open to compromise of existing implementation)
-- Change to “Agreement (Qualified)”
Line 14 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified) Divergence
Lines 15-23: Divergence

Question 18:
Lines 25-32: Agreement
Line 33 -- INTA -- Agreement (can be inferred, since they refer an intended-use provision as a balanced approach)
-- Delete the explanatory note and move to the column for notes.
Line 34 -- RySG -- Agreement (qualified) Divergence
Lines 35-42: Divergence

Names requiring government support/non- objections from the 2012 AGB (see deliberations section f.2.3.2 for context)

Question 19:
Lines 6-9: Agreement
-- Change ALAC at line 9 to “Agreement (qualified)”
Lines 10-11 -- Group of Registries and IPC -- Agreement (Qualified)
Lines 12-13 -- United States and INTA -- Agreement (Qualified), New Idea
Line 14 -- RySG -- Agreement (Qualified), Divergence
Lines 15-22: Divergence -- includes changing BRG to divergence

Question 19, Variant 1 -- Supplemental Protections:
Line 24 -- INTA -- Agreement
Line 25 -- United States -- Agreement (Qualified), Concerns
Line 26 -- ALAC -- Agreement, Divergence
-- ACTION: Justine will check the comment.
Line 27 -- IPC -- Divergence (Qualified)
Lines 28-38: Divergence

Next Meeting: 15 May at 20:00 UTC -- Start at Question 19, Variant 2 -- Change in scope of protections

_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20190509/f60353ed/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list