[CPWG] GGP Update + request for feedback

[Mutegeki Cliff]

Dear Sarah,
Thanks for sharing the presentation and the GGP updates.

Mutegeki Cliff Agaba
Digital Adoption Consultant
Vice President  Internet Society Uganda, Member AFRALO, ICANN UASG and IGF
- WGWSP
+256 701 800 679
+256 776 800 679

www.mutegekicliff.com
[image: facebook icon] <http://www.facebook.com/mutegekicliffagaba>  [image:
linkedin icon] <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mutegekicliff/> [image:
instagram icon] <http://www.instagram.com/mutegekicliff>


On Wed, 3 May 2023 at 17:57, Sarah T. Kiden via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org> wrote:

> Dear CPWG,
>
> Thank you for the feedback to our GGP presentation at the just concluded
> CPWG meeting.
>
> There were some pending issues on the chat; for example, I need to check
> with our WG about under-represented communities in developed regions. We
> had an extensive discussion about this - some members felt that we should
> not open it up too much that it presents loopholes, while others felt that
> some communities in developing regions deserve support. Several scenarios
> were presented - would the program support small businesses in under-served
> regions? How about public entities (e.g., if a ccTLD that is operated by a
> public entity applies for support)? So it is an evolving discussion, and we
> are happy to check with the WG and come back to you (Greg, Justine and the
> CPWG) about this.
>
> For now, the agreement was to use the UN definition
> <https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/#fn2> for under-developed,
> and then use the GAC
> <https://gac.icann.org/working-group/gac-working-group-on-underserved-regions-usrwg>
>  and SubPro
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-report-newgtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-02feb21-en.pdf>
> definition for under-served. Roberto promised to follow up, so we are happy
> to discuss this. This is the GAC definition:
>
>
> *An under-served region is defined as one that:*
>
>
>    -
> *Does not have a well developed DNS and/or associated industry or economy;
>    and/or *
>    - *Has low awareness within its government of ICANN, ICANN’s role and
>    functions and policy processes and the way that these policies affect it.*
>
> We have also noted John's suggestion about adjusting the review period to
> 3 years instead of 2 to investigate if applicants are still in business as
> registry operators. This is a welcome suggestion.
>
> Finally, kindly take a look at the attached document with revised
> lifecycle elements, implementation guidance and success metrics, then share
> any feedback with (preferably before our next GGP meeting on Monday, 08
> May). The document is also available on the Wiki
> <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=240617770#PDPs--624169151>
> .
>
> Regards,
>
> Sarah
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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) and
> the website Terms of Service (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/cpwg/attachments/20230503/3c9eb605/attachment.html>