Logo

Terri Agnew's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Anne Aikman-Scalese
28:59
Re SOI, i have been appointed as CSG voting rep to the Auction Proceeds CCWG - is that an SOI matter?
Anne Aikman-Scalese
29:33
Thaks Jeff
Julie Hedlund
29:34
@Anne: We’ll capture it.
Julie Hedlund
31:50
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RGB1DYMZAb62izAV0Uxo9pmEskYzZ4SGSa4JqWQqQ4Q/edit?usp=sharing
Julie Hedlund
31:56
Link to the doc above
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
32:31
Thanks Julie
Paul McGrady
41:35
what would be the utility of testing pre-approved RSPs? do different TLDs react in different ways to the sane system?
Paul McGrady
42:09
same system (although hoping the system is sane)
Jim Prendergast
44:34
its important to recall the info we learned from ICANN staff (I believe it was Kristine Willet) regarding PDT. There were lots of failures on initial testing. And she said it wasnt IDN tables. It was a variety of other aspects.
Jim Prendergast
45:11
I dont think we want to eliminate any parts of PDT that discovered these issues prior to delegation
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
45:16
Good point @Jim
Donna Austin, Neustar
46:01
@Jim, did Kristine provide actual statistics?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
46:09
But as to the point of timing, earlier testing can then be a boon
Susan Payne
46:49
@Jim, I don't understand. wouldn' the pre-approval process essentially involve the pre-delegation testing? So it wouldn't need to be done time after time
Jim Prendergast
47:09
I dont think so - it was at GDD Summitt. I think a lot of people were surprised by the info. At least I was.
Donna Austin, Neustar
47:45
@Jim, it it was the GDD Summit, I think we already requested the statistics but they weren't forthcoming.
Jim Prendergast
48:14
Right - would be good to get an update on that request.
Elaine Pruis
49:16
There would still be a need for pre-delegation testing lite—to make sure the name servers are correctly configured. But it would be so much less burdensome than the complete PDT from last time
Steve Chan
49:39
Christine’s team shared anecdotal information about PDT testing with this WG. I believe they indicated that statistics are not tracked for PDT, but we will look at the email previously shared and/or check with them again.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
50:19
Thanks @Steve
Donna Austin, Neustar
51:15
One of the main challenges with the IDN tables is that the testing provider changes the requirements often without notification.
Paul McGrady
53:03
Thanks all for a great discussion/chat on that.
Greg Shatan
57:32
Alvin and the CHipmunks?
Justine Chew
57:37
Oh dear, Mickey Mouse is back?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
57:41
so it seems
Jonathan Robinson (RySG)
57:44
I find Jim difficult to understand
Jim Prendergast
57:49
ill type it
Martin Sutton
58:13
Too much helium?
Paul McGrady
58:16
Alvin, Simon, Theodore.
Greg Shatan
58:22
That is the sound of more advanced beings, beyond our ability to comprehend.
Justine Chew
58:34
Party animal!
Greg Shatan
58:48
They come in peace.
Greg Shatan
59:17
All your gTLD are belong to us.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:01:37
Much
Justine Chew
01:01:38
Yay!
Phil Buckingham
01:02:35
Jeff , what is the definition of use ? does a TLD have to launch ?
Justine Chew
01:06:13
Exactly, @Jeff. What could this group do to address ICANN Org's concerns?
Kathy Kleiman
01:08:25
Just joining -- could someone send the doc link?
Kathy Kleiman
01:08:26
tx!
Emily Barabas
01:08:37
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eYhtbK_sEKWzdUjwg7zURL2HnKYTYCJeItX-h66XgEw/edit#heading=h.9icdnkvir6cz
Paul McGrady
01:09:08
will have to drop off briefly at takeoff but will Zoom back in at 10,000 feet. #pdpwgaddict
Phil Buckingham
01:10:11
thanks Jeff - but we have something like 200 . brand with only 1 . Nic . whatever . they have no intention of launching anytime soon
Justine Chew
01:10:56
.brands TLDs not launching is of less concern than non .brand TLDs
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:11:51
=1 Justine
christopher wilkinson
01:12:14
Particularly concerned about the political repercussions of warehousing of geo-names outside the corresponding jurisdiction
Jim Prendergast
01:13:03
is that on 2nd level or top level?
Alexander Schubert
01:14:06
Agreeing with Kathy
Greg Shatan
01:14:12
Is this a hypothetical, as regards geo-names?
Greg Shatan
01:14:31
If not, examples please.
Annebeth Lange
01:14:54
Agreeing with Kathy, but this is not only for geonames. Warehousing was never intended.
Kathy Kleiman
01:15:10
What data do we have about warehousing to date? Literally, New gTLDs that have not rolled out?
Susan Payne
01:15:34
but if we want to be creating a space for innovation then surely we have to allow time for innovation to occur.
Greg Shatan
01:15:41
If the city of Birmingham, Alabama registered .birmingham and did not use it, would this be an issue. Would this be
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude)
01:15:42
@Kathy, what do you consider "not rolled out"
Kathy Kleiman
01:16:01
new hand
Alexander Schubert
01:16:06
If you ask ICANN to operate a gTLD - you got to operate it. nobody "buys" a gTLD; you apply at ICANN to be the custodian.
Greg Shatan
01:16:29
“outside the jurisdiction” where there is also Birmingham, England and Birmingham, Michigan?
Justine Chew
01:16:51
To be clear, I think prevention of squatting/warehousing is still relevant reason to have a delegation deadline. I just think .brand TLDs not launching is a lesser concern than others TLDs.
Susan Payne
01:17:26
and pushing all TLDs to start selling names within a certain period encourages multiple launches all at the same time - surely a RO ought to be able to roll out at the time they believe they will lead to the best business outcome
Phil Buckingham
01:18:05
@ Kathy , same q as Jeff . I/ my company - have extensive stats on each TLD- which I could share
Greg Shatan
01:18:17
I think I am aligned with Justine’s position, but with the flexibility that Susan’s comment implies.
Martin Sutton
01:18:18
There are many factors that impact launch and use of TLDs, especially those that are not purely for commercial purposes. The last round was also hindered by many delays, which had a detrimental impact for many.
Justine Chew
01:18:25
Please do @Phil.
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:18:29
Didn’t all applications have to state their intended use? If that was to change, or not occur because roll out does not happen, is there not a procedure or penalty to address this?
Alexander Schubert
01:18:35
If you don't make available domains to the community - then others should be granted the opportunity to steward that string. At the very latest once the first 10 years went by without measurable use (a few registered domains aren't sufficient). So no use = contract cancelation.
Annebeth Lange
01:18:51
I agree with Justine here
Greg Shatan
01:19:29
What contractual obligations do the registry operators have in this regard?
Kathy Kleiman
01:20:17
@Martin - but how many? Tx!
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:20:20
Sorry all, I have to leave the call.
Martin Sutton
01:20:35
@Jeff - correct, public comment did not sway this towards any changes being required
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:20:58
Thx for joining @Donna
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:21:06
To address ICANN's concerns, minimum payments could be required for TLDs not yet launched within years after delegation and signed contract. This would have to be based on average costs.
Susan Payne
01:21:15
agree Martin
Susan Payne
01:21:48
Anne - there is a minimum payment already - $25k each year
Susan Payne
01:22:22
This already has gone out to public comment.
Kathy Kleiman
01:22:43
How many New gTLDs are not in use?
Martin Sutton
01:22:54
what problem are we trying to resolve here? And this has already gone to public comment to the community
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:23:45
@Susan - I meant a minimum payment that correlates with ICANN's cost data. I assume this is more than $25,000 or they would not have commented publicly but they did not say.
Phil Buckingham
01:24:06
maybe we could insert/ add that a .Brand application - being closed - doesn’t need to use/launch a TLD
Kathy Kleiman
01:24:15
@Phil - I would be very interested in seeing the stats -- could you share them with me/All?
Martin Sutton
01:24:22
Again, I think was discussed in depth within the WG.
Martin Sutton
01:24:33
Prior to Initial/supplemental reports
Annebeth Lange
01:24:34
What do we mean with “use”? This is a problem also with second level domains, and I do not think that has been solved.
Kathy Kleiman
01:24:35
@Phil - do you have a rough number to share now?
Greg Shatan
01:25:21
Insider Trading? This usually means trading on non-public knowledge.
Kathy Kleiman
01:25:31
@Justine wrote: To be clear, I think prevention of squatting/warehousing is still relevant reason to have a delegation deadline.
Susan Payne
01:25:37
@Anne - well $25k for 1200 TLDs is $30m per year. I'd be astonished if that doesn't cover ICANN's costs related to new gTLDs - bearing in mind this is ongoing payments on top of the original application fee
Kathy Kleiman
01:25:47
@Justine and Jeff: how do we prevent squatting?
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude)
01:26:28
How do you define squatting?
Christa Taylor
01:26:51
That concept would apply to a lot of other sections...
Christa Taylor
01:28:07
Lets not forget we purposely set a fee floor to try and counteract warehousing and gaming
Phil Buckingham
01:28:46
@ Kathy - this info is also on ntldstats & Namestat
Kathy Kleiman
01:28:51
I was quoting Justine :-)
Kathy Kleiman
01:29:14
Alexander wrote above: If you don't make available domains to the community - then others should be granted the opportunity to steward that string. At the very latest once the first 10 years went by without measurable use (a few registered domains aren't sufficient). So no use = contract cancelation.
Kathy Kleiman
01:30:22
Jeff: it seems the record should reflect that there is deep concern from many in Non-Registry Community on this call.
Kathy Kleiman
01:31:15
No polls Jeff.
Kathy Kleiman
01:31:20
Unless you identify your SG
Kathy Kleiman
01:32:07
could you repeat that?
Phil Buckingham
01:32:12
yes
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:32:55
I am marking "no" as best i would understand IPC comments
Annebeth Lange
01:33:17
No, I think this is an impossible task
Taylor Bentley
01:33:41
I'll mark 'yes' noting that GAC has not had detailed conversation on this topic
Annebeth Lange
01:33:49
I have problems finding the x and the v in the zoom
Greg Shatan
01:34:00
Shatan rhymes with Manhattan...
Emily Barabas
01:34:34
Hi Annebeth, you can find the check and x marks at the bottom of the participants window
Annebeth Lange
01:35:40
I found it, I had covered it with the chat box
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:35:59
Polling is specifically permitted by the GNSO Working Group guidelines as long as it is not treated as a "Vote" (with a capital V)
Kathy Kleiman
01:36:06
@Martin - not hypothetical. Expectation always: apply, delegate, run.
Taylor Bentley
01:36:14
In particular, I'll note that for the GAC, it wouldn't have been readily apparent that this issue relates to the broader questions (including what the problem is, if there is one, etc.) that the GAC needs more substantive conversation on
Justine Chew
01:36:40
Without clear definition of "squatting" or "use", I would suggest looking at reasonable timeline to launch for registration. Especially if the RO had prevailed in a contention set or objection. Timeline to be proposed by RO themselves. This is my personal opinion.
christopher wilkinson
01:37:14
@Martin - Noyer le poisson? CW
Greg Shatan
01:37:39
@Kathy, If this is not hypothetical, what are some examples?
Annebeth Lange
01:37:40
@ Jusstine, good suggestion
Kathy Kleiman
01:37:59
@Justine: definitely something to build on.
Greg Shatan
01:39:26
Drowning the fish?
Justine Chew
01:39:31
With the exception being .brands
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:40:35
Re: "noyer le poisson", it seems public comment on this issue is appropriate based on the polling that was done. In addition, this group has to remember the role of Minority Statements.
Phil Buckingham
01:40:46
Agreed Alex - we must distinguish between an open TLD and a Closed / Brand one
Susan Payne
01:41:10
but Anne we already conducted a public comment on this
Susan Payne
01:41:44
we can't endlessly just keep throwing things out for repeated comment
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:42:16
"noyer le poisson" + minimizing a individual contribution or causing the speaker to be diverted from his/her point.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:42:46
Thanks Alexander
Annebeth Lange
01:43:51
Use will mean different things for “pure gTLDs” and .brands, which will not have registrants in the usual way
Alexander Schubert
01:44:00
Once you open the string for registration - it's open and people can register.
Alexander Schubert
01:44:34
And Spec 13 registries should be viewed dufferently.
Alexander Schubert
01:44:43
differently
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:44:50
@Susan - I don't think the word "endlessly" applies given the format of the Initial Report, which occurred without discussion of the issues by the Full Working Group. Again, we were promised that discussion when we all agreed to put out the Initial Report based solely on Work Track "general agreement". This approach of now rejecting the full public comment is just going to get us a bottleneck at the Board level.
Julie Hedlund
01:45:29
Link to the doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eYhtbK_sEKWzdUjwg7zURL2HnKYTYCJeItX-h66XgEw/edit?usp=sharing
Justine Chew
01:50:04
Is it within this group's scope to consider or review the thresholds used for meeting compliance and triggering sanctions? If not, then whose job would that be?
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:51:57
What can be done about it would not be a question of regulating pricing - need a different remedy because the RA prohibits ICANN from regulating pricing - as far as I know.
Michelle DeSmyter
01:52:58
20:00 UTC
Emily Barabas
01:52:59
Tuesday at 20:00 UTC
Julie Hedlund
01:53:05
Thursday :-)
Emily Barabas
01:53:07
Sorry, Thursday :)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:53:10
Thanks for a good lot of progress today, more later in the week of course... Thursdays call at 2000 UTC Bye for now
Annebeth Lange
01:53:22
Bye all!