[council] Motion regarding the PCRequested by the IDNs-EPDP Team

Wed Nov 16 08:29:05 UTC 2022

Hello Paul

Thanks for your clarification (and thank you, too, Tomslin for jumping into the discussion).

We’ve discussed the issue again within the IDN EPDP leadership team and I would like to share below, Donna’s reply to you.

Best regards

@__f_f__
____________________________________

Lt-Colonel Farell FOLLY, Ir.

GNSO Councillor - ICANN (Los Angeles, USA).
https://www.linkedin.com/in/farellf/?locale=en_US 

Dear Paul,

I understand your concerns that the revised timeline for the completion of the IDN EPDP may impact the launch date for the next round of new gTLDs. However, as there is no timeline or date certain for a next round launch it is difficult for the IDN EPDP team to factor this into our work plan.

As discussed with Council recently, I do believe that bifurcating our work and prioritising the top-level IDN related recommendations is important so that those recommendations are available to be included in the implementation planning for SubPro and mitigating possible delays to that process. The IDN EPDP Team is committed to meeting the revised timelines in the Project Change Request (PCR) for Phase 1.

As also discussed with Council, the Phase 2 publication dates are deliberately conservative to avoid the need to submit another PCR, but primarily because we cannot commence deliberation of many of the charter questions until we undertake additional data collection efforts including information from Contracted Parties TechOps Group about the viability of applying the same entity principle to the ‘registrant’ at the second level. I hope to have a better understanding of these issues by mid-next year and at that time I can update the Council on our latest information.

I noted during the call with Council that we may, at some point, request the opportunity for the IDN EPDP Team to conduct dedicated work and make substantive progress on our deliberation, including the possibility of a dedicated face-to-face meeting. Should it become evident in the future that the launch of the next new gTLD round is dependent upon the completion of the IDN EPDP, I will likely make such a request as well as seek guidance from the Council on how to speed up the work. 

Regards,
Donna Austin

> On 8 Nov 2022, at 16:05, McGrady, Jr., Paul D. <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Tomslin.  I wish it did.  I guess the way to read it is that the Phase 2 policy work has to be done before the next round and that any implementation could take place parallel to the next round.  The PCR says this about when the policy work for Phase 2 will be wrapped up:
>  
> “Publish Phase 2 Initial Report for Public Comment by April 2025
> Submit Phase 2 Final Report to the GNSO Council by November 2025
> ○ Note: since the EPDP Team is not expected to start Phase 2 deliberation before November
> 2023, the projected milestone dates for Phase 2 have more uncertainty and are subject change, based on the observation of the team’s progress during Phase 2 deliberations.”
>  
> So, November 2025 would be the soonest that Org has the Phase 2 missing piece so at that point they could begin final preparations for the next round?  That would put the next round at November 2026, soonest.  Since ICANN is no longer a government contractor, it has sprouted many, chaotic competitors in the so-called crypto domain name space.  A 2026 launch date for the next round isn’t practical.  Please let me know if you are reading this differently.  If you are not, we need to have Donna back in to answer the question directly and give us a different plan that won’t delay the next round for another 4 years (noting we are already 10 years behind the schedule found in the last Applicant Guidebook).  If you are reading it differently, we still need Donna to confirm one way or the other since if I can read it one way, and you can read it another (both of us being very reasonable people), then the text is unclear. 
>  
> Best,
> Paul
>  
>  
> From: Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com> 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2022 3:48 AM
> To: McGrady, Jr., Paul D. <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>
> Cc: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>; GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [council] Motion regarding the PCRequested by the IDNs-EPDP Team
>  
> Hi Paul, 
>  
> I think this excerpt from the PCR answers that question, no?
>  
> "The EPDP Team believes that bifurcating its work will prioritize the current planning of the SubPro implementation that is focused primarily on the top-level. This approach does not remove the interaction of the second-level work by the EPDP Team with the SubPro implementation. While most of the second-level related questions need to be addressed before the next round, their implementation can be performed near the end of the implementation cycle."
> 
> Warmly, 
> Tomslin
>  
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022, 08:18 McGrady, Jr., Paul D. via council, <council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>> wrote:
> Thanks Farrell.  Did we ever get a direct answer as to whether or not this proposed extension would affect the timeline for the next round of TLDs?  I don’t know how to vote until I get a direct answer on that.  Thanks for any news (or any news anyone else on this email may have)!
>  
> Best,
> Paul
>  
>  
>  
> 
> Taft
>  /
> Paul D. McGrady, Jr.
> Partner
> PMcGrady at taftlaw.com <mailto:PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>
> Dir: 312.836.4094   |   Cell: 312.882.5020
> Tel: 312.527.4000   |   Fax: 312.754.2354
> 111 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 2600
> Chicago, Illinois 60601-4208
> 
> Download vCard <http://www.taftlaw.com/vcard/PMcGrady@taftlaw.com>
> taftlaw.com <http://www.taftlaw.com/>
> 
>  <https://taftlawpr.blob.core.windows.net/taft/files/fileuploads/62f506bb609f40002f521357/Taft%20Jaffe%20Logo%20-%20Signature%20Block-02.png>
> Jaffe is joining Taft, effective Dec 31, 2022.
> Learn more here. <https://www.taftlaw.com/news-events/news/taft-expands-midwest-reach-and-capabilities-with-jaffe-raitt-heuer-and-weiss-merger-in-detroit-market>
>  
>  
> This message may contain information that is attorney-client privileged, attorney work product or otherwise confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, use and disclosure of this message are prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
> 
> From: council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council-bounces at gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Farell FOLLY via council
> Sent: Monday, November 7, 2022 3:10 PM
> To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
> Subject: [council] Motion regarding the PCRequested by the IDNs-EPDP Team
>  
>  
> Dear Councillors,
>  
> Following my previous e-mail regarding the PCR for the timeline extension requested by the IDNs-EPDP Team, I would like to share the draft Motion to be considered during our next Council Meeting later this month.
> 
> 
> Best regards
>  
>  
> @__f_f__
> 
> ____________________________________
> 
> Lt-Colonel Farell FOLLY, Ir.
> 
> GNSO Councillor - ICANN (Los Angeles, USA).
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/farellf/?locale=en_US <https://www.linkedin.com/in/farellf/?locale=en_US> 
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org <mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20221116/1d5a7895/attachment-0001.html>