<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [bc-gnso] LAST CALL: Draft v2 of BC comments on latest gTLD Guidebook
- To: "Steve DelBianco" <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] LAST CALL: Draft v2 of BC comments on latest gTLD Guidebook
- From: <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 07:07:28 -0700
<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt;"><div>Steve,</div><div><br></div><div>Based on the text of the
April 2011 discussion draft, our earlier comments are moot. Take 'em
out. </div><div><br></div><div>Berard<br></div>
<blockquote id="replyBlockquote" webmail="1" style="border-left: 2px solid
blue; margin-left: 8px; padding-left: 8px; font-size:10pt; color:black;
font-family:verdana;">
<div id="wmQuoteWrapper">
-------- Original Message --------<br>
Subject: [bc-gnso] LAST CALL: Draft v2 of BC comments on latest gTLD<br>
Guidebook<br>
From: Steve DelBianco <<a
href="mailto:sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
Date: Wed, May 11, 2011 8:39 am<br>
To: "'<a href="mailto:bc-GNSO@xxxxxxxxx";>bc-GNSO@xxxxxxxxx</a> GNSO list'"
<<a href="mailto:bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx";>bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
<br>
<div><div><div>On 27-Apr I circulated draft BC comments on the latest
Applicant Guidebook (original email at bottom)</div><div>Since then, here are
comments and edits received:</div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0
0 40px; border:none; padding:0px;"><div>- Philip Sheppard amended module 5
section on criteria for marks entering TM
Clearinghouse.</div><div><br></div><div>- 3 members (Jarkko, Jon Nevett, Mike
Rodenbaugh) want to remove the BC recommendation for an initial batch smaller
than the 500 application batch planned by ICANN. Note that the batch size
does not limit the applications in the upcoming UNLIMITED round of new gTLDs.
This batch is an operational concept introduced by ICANN to recognize
capacity limitations in application processing. The BC recommendation is:
"The BC believes this first batch should be significantly fewer than 500
applications, in order to test the operational readiness of newly designed
application processing and objection / contention systems." With
that understanding, I do not see why the BC should remove that
comment.</div></blockquote><div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;
border:none; padding:0px;"><div><br></div><div>- Per Jarkko, I changed summary
page to avoid implication that GAC Scorecard agrees with all remaining BC
concerns.</div><div><br></div><div>- Phil Corwin suggested that our
comment on URS is outdated, since URS is much improved. Phil also objects
to the BC recommendation for transfer of domains through a URS process.
Is there more support for Phil's
view?</div></blockquote><div> </div><div>These comments are due 15-May.
Members are invited to address remaining questions (in red) in the
attached draft. Namely:</div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0
0 40px; border:none; padding:0px;"><div>- p.2 includes our previous request for
further economic studies. I suggest we delete
this.</div><div><br></div><div>- p.6 includes our previous request for
definitions in limited public interest process, proposed by John Berard.
John — do we still need these definition requests?</div><div><br></div><div>-
p. 9 includes a suggested definition for single-registrant TLD: a TLD
where the Registry Operator is the registrant of record for all domain names in
the TLD. Any objections?</div><div><br></div><div>- pages 10 and 11
include our prior recommendations for flexibility for single-registrant TLDs.
I do not think these comments are still needed any
longer. </div><div><br></div><div>- p. 12 shows a change to the carve-out
for single-registrant TLDs. Any objections?</div><div><br></div><div>-
p.14 includes our prior comment on PDDRP. What are our specific
recommendations given the latest PDDRP
process?</div><div><br></div></blockquote><div>Please reply to list with
specific answers. However, please don't add new issues -- the time
for that has
passed.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Steve</div><div><br></div><div>---</div><div><br></div></div></div></div><span
id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div>On 4/27/11 2:57 PM, "Steve DelBianco"
<<a target="_blank"
href="mailto:sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>>
wrote:</div></div><div><br></div><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0,
0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div>Per discussion on our 21-Apr member call,
here is a draft framework for BC comments on the 15-Apr-2011
Guidebook.</div><div><br></div><div>This comment period and docs are described
at <a target="_blank"
href="http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-6-en.htm";>http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-6-en.htm</a> </div><div>These
comments are due 15-May, giving us 18 days for edits, review, and
approval.</div><div><br></div><div>For this initial draft, I updated our
Dec-2010 Guidebook comments in several ways:</div><blockquote style="margin:0 0
0 40px; border:none; padding:0px;"><div>- Acknowledged areas where ICANN made
changes consistent with BC recommendations.</div><div>- Moved all our RPM
concerns to Module 5</div><div>- Asked several questions for BC members (in
red) </div><div>- Added a proposed definition for "Single-Registrant TLD".
We may hold a separate call on
this.</div><div><br></div></blockquote><div>All BC members are invited to
suggest edits. Please use track changes and circulate to BC
list. </div><div>I will assemble another draft version with all
changes received as of May 1. </div><div><div><br></div><div>Below are the
primary contributors from our Dec-2011 comments, organized by
module. </div><div><br></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;
border:none; padding:0px;"><div>Module 1: Introduction to New gTLD Application
Process and Fees. (Berry Cobb, Ron Andruff
)</div><div><br></div><div>Module 2: Evaluation Procedures.
(Philip Sheppard, Jon Nevett, Adam Palmer, Zahid Jamil,
Sarah Deutsch )</div><div><br></div><div>Module 3: Dispute
Resolution. ( John Berard, Ron Andruff )</div><div><br></div><div>Module
4: String Contention. ( Ron Andruff
)</div><div><br></div><div>Module 5: Transition to Delegation; Registry
Agreement, Code of Conduct, RPMs</div><div>( Philip Sheppard, Fred
Fellman, Berry Cobb, Jon Nevett, Sarah Deutsch
)</div></blockquote></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px; border:none;
padding:0px;"><div><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Other
notes:</div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px; border:none;
padding:0px;"><div>In our SFO comments, the BC said the new gTLD communications
plan should help the world's businesses and users understand changes coming in
the DNS. But I didn't see anything in the latest Guidebook about the
Communications Plan. So that comment was not reflected in the attached
draft. </div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Steve
DelBianco</div><div>vice chair for policy coordination</div><blockquote
style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left:
40px; border-top-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-bottom-style:
none; border-left-style: none; border-width: initial; border-color: initial;
padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px;
"><div><br></div></blockquote><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div
style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break:
after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; "><span
id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0,
0, 0); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; "><span
id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0,
0, 0); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; "><span
id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0,
0, 0); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; "><span
id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0,
0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><div><blockquote style="margin-top:
0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 40px;
border-top-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-bottom-style: none;
border-left-style: none; border-width: initial; border-color: initial;
padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px;
"></blockquote></div></div></div></span></div></div></span></div></div></span></div></div></span></div></div></span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></span>
</div>
</blockquote></span></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|