[Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: Request for input from the GNSO Council regarding the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG

Mike Rodenbaugh mike at rodenbaugh.com
Tue Sep 13 04:20:52 UTC 2016


Thanks Jeff.  Do you have links to the BC and/or ALAC input which is
mentioned in the letter?

Best,
Mike

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
http://rodenbaugh.com

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>
wrote:

> All,
>
>
>
> Please find enclosed a letter we received today from the GNSO Council
> Chair.  I have reproduced the text below for those not wanting to open the
> PDF doc.  The letter asks for our input by *September 25th* so that the
> Council can discuss on its September 29th call.  This is obviously not
> much time, so discussion is encouraged on the list.  I am also going to ask
> that each of the Sub-team chairs cover this letter on their next calls and
> we will also discuss this on our next full group call on Monday the 19th.
>
>
>
> Please let us know if you have any questions.
>
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
>
> 12 September 2016
>
>
>
> GNSO COUNCIL REQUEST FOR INPUT REGARDING NEW GTLD SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURES
>
>
>
> Dear Stakeholder Group, Constituency and new gTLD Subsequent Procedures
> Chairs,
>
>
>
> On 5 August 2016, the GNSO Council received a letter from the ICANN Board
> requesting feedback on the timing of subsequent procedures for new gTLDs.
> The GNSO Council is now seeking input from Stakeholder Groups,
> Constituencies and the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG to help inform
> the Council’s response to the Board. The Council anticipates an initial
> review of this input during its meeting on 29 September in view of
> finalizing its response during the 13 October meeting, so the earlier your
> input is received, the better but it should be received no later than 25
> September.
>
>
>
> In its letter, the Board asked the GNSO Council to provide its
> perspectives on the work plan of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP and
> the timing of a new application process for gTLDs:
>
>
>
> The Board is interested in the GNSO’s view of its current work in light of
> the existing policy recommendations and related review activities…For
> example, assuming all other review activities are completed, it would be
> helpful to understand whether the GNSO believes that the entirety of the
> current Subsequent Procedures PDP must be completed prior to advancing a
> new application process under the current policy recommendations. The Board
> is cognizant that it may be difficult to provide a firm answer at this
> stage of the process as the reviews are still underway and the PDP is in
> its initial stages of work, but if any consideration has been given in
> relation to whether a future application process could proceed while policy
> work continues and be iteratively applied to the process for allocating new
> gTLDs, or that a set of critical issues could be identified to be addressed
> prior to a new application process, the Board would welcome that input.
>
>
>
> The Board would also welcome any elaboration on the expected time frame
> outlined in the PDP Work Plan, as well as any additional points the GNSO
> might wish to clarify for the Board in its efforts to support the various
> areas of work underway in the multistakeholder community.
>
>
>
> The Business Constituency has already held discussions about the Board’s
> question and shared its views with the Council. In addition, the ALAC
> liaison to the GNSO Council gave ALAC input during the Council’s last
> meeting. Stakeholder Groups, Constituencies and the new gTLD Subsequent
> Procedures PDP WG are encouraged to review this input in formulating
> responses within their own groups.
>
>
>
> The GNSO Council anticipates that this issue will be a topic of community
> discussion at ICANN57 in November and therefore seeks to provide a response
> to the Board prior to ICANN57. We look forward to receiving your input.
>
>
>
> With best regards,
>
>
>
> Donna Austin, GNSO Vice Chair James Bladel, GNSO Chair Heather Forrest,
> GNSO Vice Chair
>
>
>
> *Jeffrey J. Neuman*
>
> *Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA* | *Com Laude USA*
>
> 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600
>
> Mclean, VA 22102, United States
>
> E: jeff.neuman at valideus.com or jeff.neuman at comlaude.com
>
> T: +1.703.635.7514
>
> M: +1.202.549.5079
>
> @Jintlaw
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Emily Barabas [mailto:emily.barabas at icann.org]
> *Sent:* Monday, September 12, 2016 3:27 PM
> *Subject:* Request for input from the GNSO Council regarding the New gTLD
> Subsequent Procedures PDP WG
>
>
>
> Dear Jeff and Avri,
>
>
>
> As you know, the GNSO Council received a letter from the ICANN Board on 5
> August requesting feedback on the timing of subsequent procedures for new
> gTLDs. The GNSO Council is now seeking input from the New gTLD Subsequent
> Procedures PDP Working Group, Stakeholder Groups, and Constituencies to
> help inform the Council’s response.
>
>
>
> Please see the attached letter from the GNSO Council with additional
> information regarding its request. *Note that the deadline for feedback
> is* *25 September*. Steve, Julie, and I look forward discussing how we
> can support the Working Group in preparing a response.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Emily
>
>
>
> *Emily Barabas *| Policy Specialist
>
> *ICANN* | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>
> Email: emily.barabas at icann.org | Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20160912/9299d534/attachment.html>


More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list