Re: [council] Singapore Agenda Item: New gTLDs, Subsequent Application Rounds

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

One question I have upfront.

As the thousands of flowers are blooming, do we need another round or 
could we recommend that we go into a first come first served 
methodology.  Sure some will rush the starting gun, but it would 
simplify mechanisms greatly.  And various forms of batching could stil 
occur.
I am not even sure I think it will be the right time, but I think it is 
a question we should consider and not automatically assume the council 
would recommend another round like the horror we are in.  How many of us 
really want to see the current practice and process repeated?
avri

On 18-Mar-14 08:54, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> hi James,
>
> you bring up a good point.  what if a sub group went off and started compiling 
> that list of objectives and obstacles?
>
> mikey
>
>
> On Mar 18, 2014, at 7:45 AM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I think we can acknowledge that the timeline for Round 2 is off target (by 
> > years!), but see no harm I periodically revisiting this commitment, and 
> > understanding what obstacles remain in front of it. Otherwise, we run the risk 
> > that the next phase of the program is deferred indefinitely, in favor of the 
> > hot topic du jour.
> >
> > Thank you--
> >
> > J.
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > > On Mar 18, 2014, at 7:31, "Novoa, Osvaldo" <onovoa@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I agree with Mikey.
> > > Best regards,
> > > Osvaldo
> > >
> > > El 18/03/2014, a las 08:28, "Mike O'Connor" 
> > > <mike@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx>> escribió:
> > >
> > > hi all,
> > >
> > > i’ll speak personally, i haven’t checked with the constituency on this.  i would go a notch 
> > > further than Jonathan — this item seems premature.  partly because of external events, partly 
> > > because the rollout *is* taking longer than the framers of the Applicant Guidebook envisaged.  i’m 
> > > not ruling it out, but my immediate reaction is quite muted.
> > >
> > > mikey
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mar 18, 2014, at 7:19 AM, Jonathan Robinson 
> > > <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks Bret,
> > >
> > > I think this item may have got eclipsed by all of the other activity on Friday 
> > > and over the weekend.
> > >
> > > In any case, the point is noted and currently I think we can aim to fit this 
> > > into the weekend sessions.
> > >
> > > The draft agenda for Wednesday is looking full-ish for a two hour meeting but I 
> > > am open to persuasion as to whether we discuss this on Wed.
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> > > From: Bret Fausett [mailto:bret@xxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: 14 March 2014 15:39
> > > To: Council
> > > Subject: [council] Singapore Agenda Item: New gTLDs, Subsequent Application 
> > > Rounds
> > >
> > > Dear Councillors,
> > >
> > > I would like to propose that we add some time on our Singapore agenda for 
> > > discussing next steps in preparation for Round 2 of the new gTLD launch. As you 
> > > may know, in the Applicant Guidebook, ICANN wrote the following about 
> > > subsequent new gTLD rounds:
> > >
> > > 1.1.6 Subsequent Application Rounds
> > >
> > > ICANN’s goal is to launch subsequent gTLD application
> > > rounds as quickly as possible. The exact timing will be
> > > based on experiences gained and changes required after
> > > this round is completed. The goal is for the next application
> > > round to begin within one year of the close of the
> > > application submission period for the initial round.
> > >
> > > ICANN has committed to reviewing the effects of the New
> > > gTLD Program on the operations of the root zone system
> > > after the first application round, and will defer the
> > > delegations in a second application round until it is
> > > determined that the delegations resulting from the first
> > > round did not jeopardize root zone system security or
> > > stability.
> > >
> > > It is the policy of ICANN that there be subsequent
> > > application rounds, and that a systemized manner of
> > > applying for gTLDs be developed in the long term.
> > >
> > > The "the close of the application submission period for the initial round” was 
> > > May, 2012, so the goal for the launch of Round 2 has already been missed, by a material 
> > > amount of time. I think we all would agree that many aspects of the program, from the 
> > > application process to the review and implementation, should be reviewed and revisited.
> > >
> > > Let’s spend some time discussing “subsequent application rounds" and see if we 
> > > can come to a shared understanding of what the proper next steps would be, including the role of 
> > > the Council and the GNSO in the review process.
> > >
> > > I’m looking forward to seeing everyone in Singapore.
> > >
> > >       Bret
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bret Fausett, Esq. • General Counsel, Uniregistry, Inc.
> > > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 200 • Playa Vista, CA 90094-2536
> > > 310-496-5755 (T) • 310-985-1351 (M) • 
> > > bret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > — — — — —
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bret Fausett, Esq. • General Counsel, Uniregistry, Inc.
> > > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 200 • Playa Vista, CA 90094-2536
> > > 310-496-5755 (T) • 310-985-1351 (M) • bret@xxxxxxxx<mailto:bret@xxxxxxxx>
> > > — — — — —
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: 
> > > www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, 
> > > Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene 
> > > información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo 
> > > anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está 
> > > prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las 
> > > específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación 
> > > que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información
> > >
> > >
> > > This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the 
> > > addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender 
> > > immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. 
> > > Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not 
> > > the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any 
> > > communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.
>
> PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP 
> (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)