[Newgtld-input] ICANN Seeks input on gTLD Batching

[Crescent Ezekwu]

Dear ICANN

 

We at Valideus have submitted 121 applications on the behalf of our gTLD
clients and welcome the opportunity to contribute towards this discussion. 

 

In response to your request for input on gTLD Batching we would like to
provide the following comments: 

 

 

1.            We are encouraged to see that efficiencies are being sought by
the evaluators - evaluating applications which have responses from the same
technical provider together, or are from the same applicant. This should be
extended as much as possible to include further efficiencies such as
evaluating all city or community registries together. 

 

2.            All applications which we know will be in contention should be
removed from the batch. It is fair and equitable to evaluate these
applications after those which are uncontested. It will also lead to more
urgency in publishing String Contention sets. 

 

3.            In addition, ICANN should give applicants who are happy to
wait an opt-out so that they are processed alongside those in Contention
sets. 

 

4.            Applicants could be given a financial incentive to wait and
have their gTLD(s) delegated later:  e.g. a refund of $25,000 per gTLD. 

 

 

5.            Finally, a self-designated priority system could be used to
smooth out applications that are ready to transition to delegation from
June/July 2013. 

 

Of the total 1930 applications (including the 3 unknown withdrawals), 1179
are for unique strings. This means that - subject to objections and the
announcement of contention sets - about 1000 gTLDs will be ready for
transition to delegation in June/July 2013.  

 

Looking at these 1179 uncontested strings, there are approximately 594
unique applicants (including portfolio applicants). Utilising a
self-designated priority system, ICANN could - once results are posted in
June/July 2013 - ask these unique applicants to submit one priority
uncontested gTLD for early transition to delegation. 

 

Starting from a random applicant in this group, ICANN could then allow each
of these approximately 594 uncontested gTLDs to begin transition to
delegation. 

 

Where the applicant has applied for other gTLDs that are similar to its
priority application, ICANN could then enter into contractual negotiations
for these alongside negotiations for the priority application. This would
ensure efficiencies in contracting are maximised, without causing
bottlenecks at IANA.  

 

This self-designated priority system would be subject to ICANN defining its
capacities beforehand.  One way to do this would be to set out a clear
target delegation number for 2013, in light of staffing limits within its
legal department and capacity at IANA. 

 

 

Regards

 

Crescent Ezekwu

Client Project Manager

Valideus

 

From: newgtld-input [mailto:newgtld-input at icann.org] 
Sent: 29 July 2012 23:16
To: Undisclosed recipients:
Subject: ICANN Seeks input on gTLD Batching

 

Dear Applicant:

 

Opportunity for Community Input: Processing of New gTLD Applications

 

At the Prague ICANN meeting, the new gTLD Program Committee decided to
terminate Digital Archery, and instructed ICANN staff to proceedwith the
initial evaluation of applications as quickly as possible. This evaluation
is in progress based on a tentative project plan that foresees the
processing of applications in a single batch, and simultaneous release of
results. ICANN believes this approach is consistent with the constraints
that various parts of the community have in performing their respective
roles in the evaluation process, and with the feedback received from the
community at the Prague meeting.

This comment opportunity seeks input on requirements for an evaluation and
delegation process consistent with previous root zone scaling discussions of
smooth delegations, adding no more than 1,000 new gTLDs per year. This
outcome can be achieved by the:

1.     timing of the release of evaluation results to applicants,

2.     timing of the release of applications into the pre-delegation steps
of contract execution and pre-delegation testing,

3.     metering of delegations of new gTLDs into the root zone.

ICANN is committed to executing the evaluation and delegation process in a
way that is equitable and meets ICANN's commitment to ensuring the security
and stability of the DNS, consistent with previously established root zone
scaling goals.

 

Please write to new <mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> gtld
<mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> - <mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> input
<mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> @ <mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> icann
<mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> . <mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> org
<mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org>  with your input. Comments received by 19
August 2012 (UTC 00:00) will be considered.

Background

The concept of batching has been a part of the Applicant Guidebook since its
first draft. Batching accomplishes three goals:

1.     Better management of the evaluation process by placing an upper bound
on the number of evaluators necessary and the number of parallel evaluations
occurring at any one time.

2.     Release of evaluation results to applicants according to a
predictable schedule.

3.     Delegation of TLDs at a rate acceptable to the technical community,
consistent with the root zone scaling discussion.

Based on the definitive information that ICANN now has about the pool of
applications, and work on the evaluations to date, this commentprocess seeks
input to meet requirements for goals #2 and #3.

Leading up to and during ICANN's meeting in Prague, the applicant and
community positions on requirements for batching schemes thatwould control
the evaluation, communication and delegation of applications were reported
to be:

1.     The batching solution has to be equitable.

2.      The evaluation results have to be announced at the same time.

3.     Successful applications should proceed to delegation phase without
undue delays.

4.     Delegation to the root must be at a smooth rate and must not exceed
1,000 per year.

5.     The GAC is planning to issue early warnings shortly after the Toronto
ICANN meeting in October 2012.

6.     Consideration by the GAC of issues concerning GAC advice on
contentious applications is not expected to be finalized before the Beijing
meeting in April 2013.

During the root scaling discussion, it was agreed that ICANN would not
delegate TLDs at a rate greater than 1,000 per year. This is because the
primary challenge with maintaining root zone stability is controlling the
rate of change to the root zone system and not the size of the root zone
itself, meaning delegation should not occur at a rate of 1,000 delegations
on a single day.

In Prague, the batching and prioritization method known as Digital Archery
was terminated and eliminated from further consideration.

Recent Developments

Initial evaluation of new gTLD applications is underway.

Applications are being distributed to evaluators in a way that enables
efficient processing.

ICANN has conducted pilot evaluations and had discussions with evaluators to
accelerate the evaluation schedule. As a result of thesediscussions, the
evaluation teams have committed to accelerate the evaluations substantially,
while processing them in a single batch.

In Prague, a methodology was discussed where the smooth delegation of
applications could occur by first releasing applications that passed initial
evaluation without the need for clarifying questions, then releasing
applications in order of the number of clarifying questions required, from
fewest to highest. After analysis, this methodology proved unworkable
because 80% to 90% of the total evaluation time is required to form and ask
clarifying questions, so little smoothing would result.

The current plan indicates that initial evaluation of all applications,
processed in a "single batch", can be completed in 11-12 months, possibly
less - resulting in publication of results in June-July 2013.

Note: It is planned that regular updates to applicants during the evaluation
period will be provided. In addition to written reports, ICANN is looking
into the use of a webinar / conference call format to deliver updates.

For applicants, releasing results in a single batch would mean that the
first delegations would occur in late third quarter of 2013, six months
later than originally expected.

Implications of GAC timing: 

The GAC plans to "issue any Early Warnings shortly after the Toronto ICANN
meeting, in October 2012," meaning that Early Warnings would be received
within the currently planned single evaluation period.

Also, the GAC "is considering the implications of providing any GAC advice
on gTLD applications. These considerations are not expected to be finalized
before the Beijing meeting in April 2013." This is shortly before the
currently planned announcement of initial evaluation results (i.e., the
schedule without additional accelerations beyond those stated above).

Statement of the Issue

While there will be some natural smoothing as applications take different
paths through objections and contention resolution processes, there will
still be a requirement for some method of metering applications into the
delegation process. This is due to the relatively high number of
applications that mayreach pre-delegation steps at essentially the same
time. A metering method has not yet been determined and will need to be
developed.

Questions to be answered by comments

Submitted comments should specifically answer each of the following
questions:

1.     Should the metering or smoothing consider releasing evaluation
results, and transitioning applications into the contract execution and
pre-delegation testing phases, at different times?

o    How can applications be allocated to particular release times in a fair
and equitable way?

o    Would this approach provide sufficient smoothing of the delegation
rate?

o    Provide reasoning for selecting this approach.

2.     Should the metering or smoothing be accomplished by downstream
metering of application processing (i.e., in the contract execution,
pre-delegation testing or delegation phases)?

o    How can applications be allocated to a particular timing in contract
execution, pre-delegation testing, or delegation in a fair and equitable
way?

o    Provide reasoning for selecting this approach.

o    Include a statement describing the level of importance that the order
of evaluation and delegation has for your application.

Please write to newgtld <mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> -
<mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> input <mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> @
<mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> icann <mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> .
<mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org> org <mailto:new-gtld-input at icann.org>
with your input. Comments received by 19 August 2012 (UTC 00:00) will be
considered.

Regards,

New gTLD Team