[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4] Notes and Action Items: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - Track 4 - 05 October 2017

[Rubens Kuhl]

> On Oct 12, 2017, at 11:22 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks for clarifying that Kristina.  The home page for the DNS-OARC does not make a distinction as to the particular entity:  https://www.dns-oarc.net/ <https://www.dns-oarc.net/>  Nevertheless, mentioning applicants for a frozen TLD was apparently a major “faux pas” on my part and I apologize.  To be clear,  I personally have a very high regard for both Amazon and Google and their representatives at ICANN and believe they operate at the highest level of integrity.

I will add the same level of regard to representatives of those companies at DNS-OARC, including assuming positions that contradicts the interest of other business units of their employers, although certainly being what they believe to be in the best interest of their corporations. Simple math: if someone breaks the Internet, Google loses USD 8 mi an hour in AdWords, Amazon loses USD 18 mi an hour in lost sales.

> 
> I only mentioned this funding status because several have commented that any new name collision framework could also be applied to applications that were not permitted to go forward in 2012 due to name collision issues.   The Board received a letter from some other applicants about this back in August of 2016:  https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/home-registry-inc-et-al-to-icann-board-24aug16-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/home-registry-inc-et-al-to-icann-board-24aug16-en.pdf>
I remember commenting this, but I wouldn't call one person "several".

> 
> The Board responded as follows to that letter:  https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/atallah-to-home-registry-inc-et-al-06mar17-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/atallah-to-home-registry-inc-et-al-06mar17-en.pdf>   So it’s easy to see why the Board would want to consider applying the new Name Collision Framework recommended by the GNSO Sub Pro PDP (and presumably to be adopted by the GNSO in a recommendation to the Board) to 2012 round applications that are frozen and still pending (per the public record).

Although they might consider doing it, they haven't requested it, different from closed generics; so because it's not in our charter, we can't factor it in our decision. We can reckon it might have an effect, but our only consideration needs to be subsequent procedures.

> 
> For anyone in the subgroup who does not know, the current status of .home, .corp, and .mail is listed at the ICANN website as “CONTENTION SET ON HOLD PENDING NAME COLLISION FRAMEWORK FINALIZATION”.    Please see public records pasted below.  For existing Framework provisions discussing why these names are frozen,  see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/name-collision-framework-30jul14-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/name-collision-framework-30jul14-en.pdf> ).

Just to be clear, it's the finalisation of the 2012-round name collision framework that is preventing those 3 applications from either moving forward or being terminated, not the subsequent procedures one. And in full disclosure, GDD never mentioned to me they were relying in our ongoing work to close that gap in the 2012-round... they seem to have a healthy interest in following the process, but all conversations mentioned subsequent procedures. If they are indeed waiting for us, they are keeping that to themselves.

> Once again, I would recommend that the subgroup contract for paid independent technical advice on the proposed new name collision framework as was the case in connection with the names that were frozen in the 2012 round.  I do not know why we are further delaying in this regard, especially since we apparently want to adopt three categories of risk – low, medium, and high.  This will definitely require professional, paid, and independent technical advice in my opinion.

We have gone thru this in the past and nothing has changed that would make the decision change at this point. As the saying goes, the best things in life are free... but if we can't get the best and need to settle for what can get, so be it.


Rubens


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4/attachments/20171013/081fec16/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4/attachments/20171013/081fec16/signature.asc>