[council] From Jonathan Weinberg, WG-C update and questions

[Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

--
From Jonathan Weinberg, WG-C update and questions:

To the Names Council:

	This message is to bring you up to date on the continuing work of WG-C.
The working group is currently considering two consensus calls.  The voting
period on those consensus calls ends on Monday at 4 pm UTC, and I will
forward the results immediately.

	The first item seems virtually assured of achieving rough consensus within
the working group.  It reads: "The initial rollout should include a range
of top level domains, from open TLDs to restricted TLDs with more limited
scope."

	It is too early to say whether the second item will achieve rough
consensus within the working group; the early tally is too close to call.
Derived from a set of principles drafted by Philip Sheppard and Kathy
Kleiman, it reads: 

"Criteria for assessing a gTLD application, subject to current technical
constraints and evolving technical opportunities, should be based on all of
the following principles:

1. Meaning: An application for a TLD should explain the significance of the
proposed TLD string, and how the applicant contemplates that the new TLD
will be perceived by the relevant population of net users.  The application
may contemplate that the proposed TLD string will have its primary semantic
meaning in a language other than English.

2. Enforcement: An application for a TLD should explain the mechanism for
charter enforcement where relevant and desired.

3. Differentiation: The selection of a TLD string should not confuse net
users, and so TLDs should be clearly differentiated by the string and/or by
the marketing and functionality associated with the string.

4. Diversity: New TLDs are important to meet the needs of an expanding
Internet community.  They should serve both commercial and non-commercial
goals.

5. Honesty: A TLD should not unnecessarily increase opportunities for
malicious or criminal elements who wish to defraud net users.

6. Competition: The authorization process for new TLDs should not be used
as a means of protecting existing service providers from competition."

	Again, neither of these items has *yet* achieved rough consensus; the
voting period will conclude on Monday at 4 pm UTC.

	Finally, I want to ask the NC to take some time on Tuesday considering
Working Group C's future schedule and tasks.  Indeed, should we continue
work at all?  The Board has resolved that, on the basis of Tuesday's vote
and in consultation with the NC, ICANN staff will be preparing "draft
policies, draft implementation documents, commentary, and statements of
issues" on the introduction of new gTLDs, and will solicit public comment
on those documents in advance of the Yokohama meeting.  At some point, it
may be that WG-C will no longer be able to make a timely contribution to
the process; we would appreciate your guidance.

	Thanks very much.

Jon


Jonathan Weinberg
co-chair, WG-C
weinberg@msen.com