Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Action points - JAS WG call 8 June

[Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>]

Thanks Elaine.

I think it's a very good document.   Look forward to feedback from the Group.

Some comments from me:

Proposal 2. (Graduated Fees).     Seems very reasonable to me that this should 
be adopted for the relatively small subset of applicants who will meet our 
criteria

Proposal 3. (Auction Proceeds).   The explanatory memoranda to the DAG already 
indicate that Auction Proceeds are a potential source of funding for our 
applicants -- so I expect a positive response on this proposal.

Proposal 4.  (Annual Fees).   The $25K per year (more if the registry has >50K 
names) is to cover the cost of ICANN operationally managing the TLD,  as well 
as administratively managing the relationship with the registry operator.   The 
fee was $75K per year (minimum) in earlier versions of the DAG - but was 
subsequently reduced to $25K minimum.   To put the number in perspective it 
probably represents about 1/7th of the annual cost of a fully loaded (with 
overheads) registry manager at ICANN.

Proposals 5 (Risk/ Contingency) & 6 (Fixed/ Variable).    I expect a response 
to this that any surplus funds might (or even will) be refundable,  but only 
after the TLD process is complete and all costs have been tallied.  That said,  
I have no problem with us making these recommendations.

Richard




On Jun 11, 2010, at 5:59 PM, Elaine Pruis wrote:

> Thank you Olof.
> 
> Attached is a document with the first version of the WT1 snapshot.  Working 
> Group, please submit any edits/additions/suggestions so we have a mostly 
> complete document in time for our call Tuesday, and posting on Wednesday. 
> 
> Olof, would you please upload this to the WIKI?
> <WT1 Snapshot v1.docx>
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Elaine
> 
> On Jun 8, 2010, at 8:49 AM, Olof Nordling wrote:
> 
>> Dear all,
>> Action points from today’s call:
>>  
>> 1. Charter – we continue working according to the text agreed within the WG. 
>> Due to “packet loss” of unclear nature, the reference to objective 5 seems 
>> to have been lost in the links for the GNSO Council and ALAC approval 
>> motions, calling for non-urgent corrective motions in both bodies.
>>  
>> 2. Preparation of “snapshot” for posting – target date for posting remains 
>> 15 June 2010, with a public comment period open until 15 July 2010. 
>> Structure would be a)introduction, b) WT1 paper/one-pager c) WT2 
>> paper/one-pager.
>> - Drafting to proceed on list and on Wiki
>> - Elaine volunteered to take the lead on drafting the WT1 paper
>> - Andrew volunteered to take the lead on drafting the WT2 paper, based on 
>> his previous draft
>> - Olof to draft introduction and assist with Wiki posting as needed
>> - Final version of document for posting to be agreed at next call
>>  
>> 3. Preparation of panel session at Brussels meeting, scheduled in the 
>> “Silver” room from 16.00 to 17.30  on Wednesday 23 June. Moderated by the 
>> co-chairs and with at least two members from each WT as panelist as well as, 
>> hopefully, available/interested Board members.
>> - Volunteer/available panelists from WT1  sought (Elaine?, Tony?, Tijani?, 
>> others?...)
>> - Volunteer/available panelists from WT1  sought (Andrew?, Carlos?, Rafik?, 
>> others?...)
>> - Staff to approach Katim Touray (and possibly other Board members) on 
>> availability as panelist
>> - Discussion of panel and session structure to be pursued on the list and 
>> agreed on next call
>>  
>> 4. Next call will take place on 15 June at 13.00 UTC
>>  
>> All the best
>> Olof
>>  
>> PS. If you found the layout of my previous action points mail as ugly as it 
>> actually was – oh well, I learned one thing: don’t ever try to copy-paste 
>> when using Outlook Web Access…
>>  
>>  
> 
> Elaine Pruis
> VP Client Services
> elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> +1 509 899 3161
>