[gtld-council] Drfat minutes new TLD committee teleconference 15 June 2006

["GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[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 Recording

Bruce 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