[gtld-council] Drfat minutes new TLD committee teleconference 15 June 2006
[To gtld-council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear All,The draft minutes of the new TLD committee teleconference held on 15 June 2006 are below in text version.
Please let me know if there are any changes that you would like made. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen ................................................................... PDP-Dec05 Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains Committee Meeting 15 June 2006 Proposed agenda and documents Committee members present Bruce Tonkin - Registrars C. Alistair Dixon- CBUC Greg Ruth - ISCPC Antonio Harris - ISCPC Greg Ruth - ISCPC Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries Cary Karp - gTLD registries Robin Gross - NCUC Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee Observer: Werner Staub - Core ICANN Staff Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination Liz Williams - Senior Policy Counselor Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat GNSO Council Liaisons Bret Fausett - ALAC Liaison - absent Absent: Marilyn Cade - CBUC - apologies Ross Rader - Registrars C. Tom Keller - Registrars C. Tony Holmes - ISCPC - apologies Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C - apologies Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests C - apologies Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C Sophia Bekele - Nominating Committee appointee Maureen Cubberley - Nominating Committee appointee Mawaki Chango - NCUC Norbert Klein - NCUC MP3 RecordingBruce Tonkin summarised the structure of the GNSO Initial Report on the Introduction of New generic Top-Level Domains. A fair portion of the draft recommendations for selection criteria in the report had strong support. Further feedback from the ICANN community on the sponsored round type criteria should be sought in the Marrakech public forum.
The situations where contention for a string may occur in a “first-come first served” environment was discussed assuming that the initial rounds for new gTLDs would be conducted in batches. For example, ICANN could collect applications for a three month period, and then process those applications on a first-come first served basis, expect where there were multiple applications for the same string or same purpose. For the case of contention for the same string or purpose, the question of support for an objective allocation method such as lottery or auction, or an subjective comparative evlaution needs further public input
Ken Stubbs read comments submitted by some of the gTLD registry members.The intent of the conference call was not to debate policy issues, but to improve and clarify the wording in the report and add new material that might come out of the current discussions in the Final Report.
Bruce Tonkin requested suggestions for further input during the Marrakech meetings.
What input, and what topics could be expected from the GAC.?It was suggested identifying specific areas for the GAC to comment on up front, such as the choice of strings, and whether the GAC had strong views on string types that should be allowed.
What were GAC members' expectations within the string at the second level. What are the public policy issues associated with introducing new TLDs. What would be expected at the public forum?Keep to a brief summary of the work done and go to an open mike for public comments.
In the GNSO Council meeting the focus would be on expectation management with respect to the next steps in the process and the timeline for the next steps. The proposal to have another face-to-face meeting between Marrakech and Sao Paulo to work on the final recommendations will also be discussed.
Bruce Tonkin adjourned the meeting and thanked all the participants. Meeting adjourned at 13: 25 UTC. (15:25 CET) -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org