GAC Chair, Thomas Schneider
GNSO Council Chair, James Bladel
Develop a shared understanding of relevant issues.
GAC involvement in PDPs, in particular, the PDP WG on Subsequent Procedures
- GAC members to actively participate in relevant PDP Working Groups in an individual capacity to the extent possible.
- ACIG GAC Secretariat to continue to report to GAC on key developments.
- GAC to consider its response to the CC2 questions when received. (All GAC members + GAC Leadership + ACIG GAC Secretariat)
2-character country/territory codes at the second level
- The above discussions to be reflected in the GAC Communiqué (Completed).
- GAC Leadership and ICANN staff to liaise with the Board and ICANN organisation on follow-up arrangements.
The GAC met with the Chair and members of the GNSO Council. The key issues raised were:
- GAC involvement in PDPs, in particular, the PDP WG on Subsequent Procedures
The GAC met with the Co-Chairs of the GNSO PDP Working Group on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures; and also discussed GAC early engagement in PDPs with the GNSO Council.
GAC Members provided some feedback to the Co-Chairs on specific issues including treatment of previous GAC advice; managed rounds versus first-come-first-served; application fees; IDNs; and resolving contention sets. The issues of community-based applications, applicant support and geographic names at the top level are noted in more detail below. It was agreed that more GAC involvement in the PDP Working Group and its sub-groups would be mutually beneficial, although resource limitations in many governments are a practical barrier.
It was noted that GAC, along with other community members, would shortly receive the second set of community consultation questions (CC2) from the PDP WG.
The GAC leadership team proposed that one or two of the Vice Chairs take a lead role in
- 2-character country/territory codes at the second level
This issue was discussed at length in meetings with the Generic Names Supporting Organisation (GNSO) and the ICANN Board.
As has been the case previously, some GAC members have serious concerns about the Board’s approach to this issue and ICANN’s implementation of it. These include: Legal rights to own and control such codes being only one dimension, with political and cultural aspects being at least as important; Governments facing excessive pricing if they choose to register a code during the exclusive registration period; Processing of applications should not
Other members do not share those concerns, and some see no problems with dot brands registrations in this space. However, there was general agreement that the Board’s response to GAC advice (including the most recent Resolution on this issue) has not been clear, and that implementation by the ICANN
Members of the GNSO Council noted that current arrangements are a compromise that does not reflect the original Policy Development Process (
Board members reiterated their previous view that the Board has acted consistently with GAC advice. They offered to respond in writing to specific GAC concerns and/or to arrange discussions before the next ICANN meeting.
- Implementation Plan for the final status report of the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group: No specific concerns with the draft Implementation Plan were raised, and it was noted that action items are being progressed as resources permit. There was agreement that options for regular GAC-GNSO interaction to avoid possible disagreements at later stages in PDPs should be considered.
- Workload scheduling and management: There was agreement that multiple PDPs running in parallel are causing workload issues across the community. GAC and GNSO will continue to exchange views on possible solutions.
| Title |
|---|