Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group on Thursday, 05 September 2019 at 03:00 UTC.
will be disconnecting from time to time, due to weird connectivity
Thank you, Maxim
just having LOTS of calls @Jeff
Online version of the document here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q6_DxsCvSA_3B7ArncO2U4tWNY3vH7Wi4nINrouR4AI/edit?usp=sharing
Bottom of page 46
Also use of IDN (if any) is in Exhibit A
and if a TLD uses IDN(s) , it is checked during RST process (what is supported in the backend of the TLD)
@Jeff, you might pick any IDN TLDs
all Registries have to provide Searchable WHOIS to LEAs (protected and restricted)
got them a bonus point in eval if I rememebr correctly.
BTAPPA is the one with the coolest acronym
(Bulk Transfer After Partial Portfolio Acquisition)
RESP abbreviation itself is two things: process and policy
@Maxim, RESP or RSEP?
"China Gateway" is the most usual implementation of validated registration.
is it standardized?
The agreement amendments for Validation are indeed standardised.
2nd service in https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/fast-track-rsep-process-authorization-language-2019-06-14-en
didnt realize that
i think the crux of the argument is that ICANN should have never approved them in the first place. but need to enage NCUC on this. Is anyone from them on the call?
Robin, perhaps ?
Do I understand correctly that we are looking to amend/add to Approved Services under Exhibit A for next version of AGB?
Justine, it would be only Q23.
Not able to talk.
@Rubens, right, thanks.
Yes it is accurate.
So Ruben's "Pre-approved services" means those in Exhibit A which is not subject to evaluation. Anything outside Exhibit A is subject to evaluation.
Even those subject to evaluation will end up in Exhibit A.
Jim, not, although RySG suggested that.
It would only be the ones that are on the Fast-Track RSEP having templates.
BTW, xPML is not currently part of the Fast-Track RSEP options. It might be added down the road.
The panel is actually RSTEP, also confusing with RSEP.
“…should not be required to pay a higher application fee, unless an RSTEP is required.” - I believe this is consistent with the 2012 round, if I’m not mistaken?
Makes sense, Jeff.
You bet, bro.
This clause was added in WT4 discussion in order to foster innovation by not making it more expensive.
Yes, make sense.
ICANN Org suggestion makes sense, as long as it applies only to subsequent procedures.
Is that for implementation?
Emily's note on 126.96.36.199 -- Can we refine the reference to "list of previously approved registry services (IDN Languages, GPML, BTAPPA) will be included by reference in the AGB and RA" to make it clear which service will be included in the AGB and which will be included in the RA in respect of recommendations for implementation?
The language says to include a list by reference, so it wouldn't list specifically each service would be included.
I'm still on board, Jeff
Yeap, and even if we want to change that, it would require changing the registry services policy, not part of SubPro charter.
And the minimalist registry services idea didn't get much traction in WT4 discussions anyways.
This paragraph seems to belong to "Other Topics".
bye all, have to drop the call
There is a collision between SubPro and SSAC. ;-)
Confirmed that the next topics are Name Collisions and Objections
And the call time is Monday, 09 September 2019 at 15:00 UTC for 90 minutes
Sorry, the vacuum is super loud!
Thanks, Jeff - good work chairing at a very late hour in your time zone.
lots covered today... thanks everyone... bye until next call then...
We can hope for breathing room given that the AGM is longer than the Policy Forum....
slammed together I suspect still all up the start
ok - yeah - all subject to change - i think it was unfortunate the way it was scheduled last meeting
@Jeff, that’s what I recall as well (Sat and Mon)
Vaibhav Aggarwal(Tiger), IN
Thanks Bye Bye Now