Re: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

I have seen just as many comments calling for the process to be, if not
accelerated, at least kept on schedule.

This motion seeks to clarify something which was a part of the initial GNSO
recommendations for the new TLD program.

I think it is a useful motion and would rather voting on it not be deferred.

Thanks,

Stéphane Van Gelder


Le 17/12/08 22:50, « Rosette, Kristina » <krosette@xxxxxxx> a écrit :

> The overall effect of the motion is to hasten the opening of the application
> round.  Many of the comments I've read thus far (starting with the most recent
> and working backwards) have expressed concern about the current timetable -
> let alone an expedited one.
> 
> K
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 4:47 PM
> To: Rosette, Kristina; St?phane Van Gelder; Avri Doria
> Cc: Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
> 
> Kristina,
> 
> How would public comments affect the issues in this motion?  Regardless of the
> comments, we still have the possibility of a gap between the implementation of
> fast track IDN ccTLDs and IDN gTLDs.
> 
> Chuck 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rosette, Kristina [mailto:krosette@xxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 4:30 PM
>> To: Gomes, Chuck; St?phane Van Gelder; Avri Doria
>> Cc: Council GNSO
>> Subject: RE: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
>> 
>> Given the volume of public comment, I suggest that we defer voting on
>> this motion until all GNSO Councilors who intend to read the public
>> comments have done so.
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 4:21 PM
>> To: St?phane Van Gelder; Avri Doria
>> Cc: Council GNSO
>> Subject: RE: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
>> 
>> 
>> As I said before, I accept Stephane's amendment as a friendly
>> amendment.
>> 
>> Chuck
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of St?phane
>> Van Gelder
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 3:53 PM
>>> To: Avri Doria
>>> Cc: Council GNSO
>>> Subject: Re: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
>>> Importance: High
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I still see the same text on the wiki.
>>> 
>>> This is the text with my friendly amendment that I had on record:
>>> 
>>>> Whereas:
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> ?        Implementation Guideline E states,  ?The
>>> application submission date
>>>> will be at least four months after the issue  of the Request for
>>>> Proposal and ICANN will promote the opening of the  application
>>>> round.?  (See Final Report, Part A, Introduction of New  Generic
>>>> Top-Level Domains, dated 8 August 2007 at
>>>> 
>>> 
>> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm#
>>>> _Toc4379
>>>> 8015  )
>>>>  
>>>> * The intent of the GNSO with regard  to Guideline E was to
>>> attempt to
>>>> ensure that all potential applicants,  including those that
>>> have not
>>>> been active in recent ICANN activities  regarding the
>>> introduction of
>>>> new gTLDs, would be informed of the process  and have
>>> reasonable time
>>>> to prepare a proposal if they so  desire.
>>>> * The minimum 4-month period for  promoting the opening of the
>>>> application round is commonly referred to as  the
>>> ?Communications Period?.
>>>> * Considerable delays have been  incurred in the
>>> implementation of new
>>>> gTLDs and the GNSO wishes to minimize  any further delays.
>>>> * It appears evident that a second  Draft Applicant
>> Guidebook (RFP)
>>>> will be posted at some time after the end of  the two
>> 45-day public
>>>> comment periods related to the initial version of the
>>> Guidebook (in
>>>> English and other languages).
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Resolve:
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> ?        The GNSO Council changes  Implementation
>> Guideline E to the
>>>> following:
>>>>  
>>>> o       Best efforts  will be made to ensure that the
>>> second Draft Applicant
>>>> Guidebook is posted for  public comment at least 14 days
>> before the
>>>> first international meeting of  2009, to be held in Mexico
>>> from March 1 to March 6.
>>>>  
>>>> o       ICANN will initiate the  Communications Period at
>>> the same time that
>>>> the second Draft Applicant  Guidebook is posted for
>> public comment.
>>>>  
>>>> o       The opening of the initial  application round will
>>> occur no earlier
>>>> than four (4) months after the start  of the Communications
>>> Period and
>>>> no earlier than 30 days after the posting of  the final Applicant
>>>> Guidebook (RFP).
>>>>  
>>>> o       As applicable, promotions for the  opening of the
>>> initial application
>>>> round will include:
>>>>  
>>>> ?          Announcement about the  public comment period
>>> following the posting
>>>> of the second Draft Applicant  Guidebook (RFP)
>>>>  
>>>> ?          Information about the  steps that will follow
>>> the comment period
>>>> including approval and posting of  the final Applicant
>>> Guidebook (RFP)
>>>>  
>>>> ?          Estimates of when the  initial application round
>>> will begin.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>